Is the 70-300 L as sharp as the Canon 70-200 f4 IS? I thought about upgrading but I happen to have a very sharp 70-200 f4 IS and I would hate to lose that for the extra 100mm's.
id10t Senior Member 293 posts Likes: 105 Joined Mar 2012 Location: Boston area More info | Nov 01, 2014 09:59 | #1 Is the 70-300 L as sharp as the Canon 70-200 f4 IS? I thought about upgrading but I happen to have a very sharp 70-200 f4 IS and I would hate to lose that for the extra 100mm's. 6D/ 24-105 f4 IS/ 85 f1.8/ 70-300L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ceegee Goldmember 2,335 posts Likes: 34 Joined Mar 2008 Location: Montreal, Quebec More info | Nov 01, 2014 16:49 | #2 I owned and loved the f4 IS for many years. Like you, my copy was extremely sharp. It never let me down. However, it was a bit short for some of the sports I shoot. Gear: Canon R10, Canon RFS 18-150, Canon RF 100-400
LOG IN TO REPLY |
norf Member 125 posts Joined Nov 2010 More info | I think my 70-300L is sharper than the 70-200 f4 IS I used to own. The bokeh is much better also. IS is less noisy on the 70-300 but the 70-200 was much lighter.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
SHIF.ski Mostly Lurking 17 posts Likes: 31 Joined Nov 2012 Location: Rocky Mountains More info | Nov 01, 2014 19:00 | #4 When I purchased my 70-300L a few years ago I read every review and comparison I could find. These two in articles particular swayed me towards the 70-300L. Both reviews compare these two lenses and show compelling evidence of the superior IQ of the 70-300L. R6 Mark II / RF 24-105 f/4L / RF 70-200 f/4L / EF 100-400L II / EF 135L / Gitzo GT2545T
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Pondrader "now I'm no rocket scientist but I do get a shot or two"  16,028 posts Gallery: 2548 photos Best ofs: 5 Likes: 57084 Joined Aug 2012 Location: Minden, Ontario, Canada More info | Nov 01, 2014 19:05 | #5 ceegee wrote in post #17246212  I owned and loved the f4 IS for many years. Like you, my copy was extremely sharp. It never let me down. However, it was a bit short for some of the sports I shoot. One weekend I rented a 70-300L and was blown away by the images it produced. I found a great deal on a used one, and bought it. I used it alongside the f4 IS for several months. My conclusion: the 70-300L was equally sharp, focused just as fast and produced images of equivalent quality to the f4 IS, but gave me an additional 100 mm of reach. I recently sold my f4 IS and have no regrets. The 70-300L is outstanding. You won't be disappointed. I agree with everything Jeff ........, 7D, 70-300L, 100-400LII
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Tony_Stark Shellhead  4,287 posts Likes: 350 Joined May 2010 Location: Toronto, Canada More info | Nov 01, 2014 19:19 | #6 |
M_Six Cream of the Crop  More info | Nov 01, 2014 20:24 | #7 My 70-300L was super sharp, very light, and produced great images. I traded it in on a 70-200 f2.8L IS. The 70-200 is also sharp, but I miss that extra reach more than I enjoy the extra f-stops. If I had it to do again, I wouldn't. Mark J.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Had the 70-200 f4 with and without IS. Moved to the 70-300L and was a fool to sell it. I rectified that error by buying it again. I shoot it wide open across the range frequently and find it equally as good as the 70-200 f4's I had. R6 | R7 | 15-85is | Rokinon 14 2.8 | RF 16 2.8 | 16-35 F4is L | RF 24-105 F4is L | RF 70-200 F4is L | 100-400 II L | Σ150-600 C | 1.4X III | 2X III | 430ex |
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jrbdmb Goldmember  1,291 posts Likes: 12 Joined May 2011 More info | Nov 01, 2014 21:49 | #9 Concur with all of the above. One thing I love about this lens is it is sharp right up to 300mm - unlike most telephoto zoom lenses, there is no dropoff in performance at the long end. Tools: 70D, 10-22, Tamron 24-70 VC, 70-300L, 135 f2L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
moltengold Goldmember 4,296 posts Likes: 10 Joined Jul 2011 More info | Nov 02, 2014 05:57 | #10 norf wrote in post #17246376 I think my 70-300L is sharper than the 70-200 f4 IS I used to own. The bokeh is much better also. IS is less noisy on the 70-300 but the 70-200 was much lighter. I have used both | Canon EOS | and some canon lenses
LOG IN TO REPLY |
norf Member 125 posts Joined Nov 2010 More info | Nov 02, 2014 20:03 | #11 moltengold wrote in post #17247143 I have used both the 70-200 f/4L IS sharper than the 70-300L the 70-300L is a great lens sharp from 70mm to 300mm and it had a nice contrast , color , new IS and compact size but not sharper than the 70-200 http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0 I tested the 200L 2.8II extensively against the 70-200L f4 IS and the prime was noticeably sharper even comparing wide open to wide open. The 70-300L was much closer to the prime in my testing. However I did not own the two at the same time so it was not as scientific. But I am sure there is some sharpness variation from one lens to the next.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nethawked Senior Member More info | Nov 03, 2014 01:34 | #12 Unless the upcoming 100-400mm is incredible and reasonably priced, the 70-300mm L is the one lens that I will never part with.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 03, 2014 03:29 | #13 |
tblane2 Hatchling 4 posts Joined May 2011 More info | Nov 03, 2014 03:45 | #14 could someone tell me it the 70-300 lens is suitable for a 5dmkiii
LOG IN TO REPLY |
MedicineMan4040 The Magic Johnson of Cameras  More info | Nov 03, 2014 04:06 | #15 davidfarina wrote in post #17249039 I would say my 70-300L is right after my 135L in terms of sharpness. And not by a great margin! That says a LOT since the 135 is SHAAAAAAARRRRRRP flickr
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is Niagara Wedding Photographer 1939 guests, 157 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
