70-200 f/4 On The Way, What To Expect?

It's a lovely lens for the price, that's for sure! I keep it on at all times. I'm sure you will be very happy with it.

Thanks for this!

Would it be good to buy a UV Haze filter from B&W for protecting the glass? I use UV filters, but am wondering if the filters damage the image quality of the lens...

The filter/no filter thing is a whole other can of worms. Do a search and you'll see why. I personally use one, and if you decide to do so, just get a good one. Don't put a cheap piece of glass in front of your new L.

It's a great lens for the price and produces images of excellent quality. I do find the f/4 limiting, however, but that's just because I shoot a lot of low light sports. For the average person, it's a fine lens.

Liza, how much limiting in low light? Could you elaborate a little? wanting to stay in budget, I'm debating between this lens and the Canon 70-300 IS (my hands are not the most steady onesops, but I'm torn between IQ (70-200L) and practicability (70-300 IS)...does that makes sense?

300Dplus wrote:
Liza, how much limiting in low light? Could you elaborate a little? wanting to stay in budget, I'm debating between this lens and the Canon 70-300 IS (my hands are not the most steady onesops, but I'm torn between IQ (70-200L) and practicability (70-300 IS)...does that makes sense?

I can't shoot indoor sports with it nor can I shoot night time field sports. It's okay for daytime baseball, softball, and soccer, though. I think it depends a lot on the application. I shoot sports for newspapers, websites, and the local high school yearbook, so I need something that will shoot in lower light. Right now I'm using the 200 f/2.8L, but just ordered the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 to add to the yearbook equipment.

Thanks Liza,

So true.

I don't have any kids living at home that have concerts. My older boys were constantly performing in orchestras or plays. I would have loved the IS version then, as Ronald has been taking pictures with his without a flash. I know I won't need it for awhile. When I do, I'll definitely change to the IS version. I will also have the set up on a monopod or tripod. I absolutely hate weight hanging on my neck.

I read you Suzie, thanks for the input.

I used to own a 75-300mm is usm until I bought a 70-200mm f/4. Wow I am so glad I did. I eventually started to wonder if there was a peice of cling film over the end of the 75-300 as it seemed so poor in comparison. I really enjoy looking at any pics ive taken with the 70-200 and if they are no good its something ive neglected and not the lens!

I've just bought this lens from Kerso (thanks for the great price, I can definitely recommend him). I mainly intend to use it for outdoor, birds, animals, that sort of thing, my only worry is the British weather, not much light in winter, but should be a brilliant lens for other seasons.

The lens has arrived, thanks everyone for the opinions!

It works well, and is just as I wanted. Except the focus is LOUD!

Regards,
Happy-Aero145

try to play around with the 1.2M and 3M switch if your to close it will be loud cuz it will look for focusing, If your anywhere between 1.2m to 3m away from the subject use 1.2 after 3m use 3m

the focus is loud? is it a sigma spray painted white?

Just got my 70-200 f4 today and it is a beauty. Took it to soccer practice and shot some nice kid kicks. It's light and oh so fast. Not noisy at all.