The Eagle Has Landed: Canon 70-200 f4 L IS USM

My 70-200 f4 L IS USM arrived a few days ago and I've been putting it through the paces, both on its own and against my other tele-zooms. This lens is terrific: tremendous IQ, best "IS" unit I've ever used, small size and relatively lightweight, takes a 1.4x admirably, and all at a bargain/basement price of ...

Anyway, you can view it's "arrival" to my place and also test shots here http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/70200f4lis

FWIW, IQ is basically a wash against my 70-200 f2.8 IS. They are so close from 70mm all the way to 200mm, aperture for aperture (f4 and on). The new f4 lens, however, tends toward a warmer color tone while its "big brother" tends to render cooler images. But not much to write about really; it's not a significant difference.

IMO the new f4 IS is the closest thing to having your cake and eating it too. There really is nothing to fault about this lens (price? tripod collar not included?) If you're considering this lens, while it does cost a pretty penny, I am quite certain you won't regret the choice. Very Highly Recommended.

Here it is with my other telezooms:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

Did you get the key chain adapter for it? I cant find it in my box.

awww so cute haha. im sure its a very nice lens, how did it end up with a sigma cap on it already though.

Congrats on the new addition

Dante King wrote in post #2231659
Did you get the key chain adapter for it? I cant find it in my box.

Dante, you crack me up. I have no idea what you're talking about

its nice to see you got mounds of glass laying on the floor... I wish i had that problem when it came time to clean my room.

I bought the 70-200 f/4 before the news of the IS version. If i knew about it, I would have purchased the IS version. After much research, I will still be buying the 70-200 2/8 IS version and keeping my f/4 standard version for travel.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #2231675
awww so cute haha. im sure its a very nice lens, how did it end up with a sigma cap on it already though.

It's actually a Tamron rear cap. For some reason it came with it.

:p

StealthLude wrote in post #2231695
its nice to see you got mounds of glass laying on the floor... I wish i had that problem when it came time to clean my room.

I bought the 70-200 f/4 before the news of the IS version. If i knew about it, I would have purchased the IS version. After much research, I will still be buying the 70-200 2/8 IS version and keeping my f/4 standard version for travel.

better decision from my point of view.

StealthLude wrote in post #2231695
I will still be buying the 70-200 2/8 IS version and keeping my f/4 standard version for travel.

I've used various copies of the Canon 70-200 f2.8 non-IS, f2.8 IS, f4 non IS, the new f4 IS (one copy), and the Sigma 70-200 (both non DG and DG), and IMHO, the sharpest and most contrasty of them all is the non-IS f4. Practically-speaking, they're all freaky-good, but if you pixel peep, the non-IS is tops (if ever so slightly). So don't be mad, you've got yourself a dandy of a lens. And that f2.8IS will make it all better...

Man, I need to look under the mattress for some cash now.

nice clean carpet....

MJP wrote in post #2231916
nice clean carpet....

Looks like a rug.

Nice lenses!

WhoisDAN wrote in post #2231939
Looks like a rug.

Frankly, I don't know what it is, but it's from Costco.

Must resist. Have 100-400 on the way.

Nice pic of the 100-400 though.

It's really all about the price - for that price, plus lack of tripod collar, I would go for broke. I'd use the 100-400 to cover that range minus a little at f/4.5, then since the 70-200 duplicates that range I would want something it can't duplicate, ie. large aperture.

REALLY wish the 100-400 receieved upgraded IS though.

My 70-300 non-DO IS is my travel zoom. Boohoooo.....Dante called it a toy in his other thread!! *goes to cry in beer*

Just kidding. Optical quality is near-L except in difficult situations (I got CA yesterda on a freaking cow of all things, because the cow had black and white markings on its face and I said, holy cow, look at the green and purple haloing...). Build quality is very sorry after I have become used to the premium glass.

Canon just needed to give us the 70-200/4 IS at $800-$900.. then I'd be onto it like white on rice!!


PS: One more thought - the 70-200/2.8's (Canon/Sigma) have substantially 'heavier' zoom rings. The 70-200/4s and 70-300 non-IS have VERY light zoom rings in comparison, they take far less effort to turn, and it makes it easier if you are tracking both focus and zoom on a subject that is jumping all over the shop (beentheredoneit).

Memo to lightstream: Resistance is futile.

Have 100-400 on the way.

I hear that's a pirty good lens -- you shall enjoy it, I'm sure.

Why thank you.

There's nothing wrong with the current IS; in fact I find it very good. And a new IS unit would surely bump the cost up even more. Don't sweat it.

Never heard that expression, but okay.

Don't hold your breath because it ain't going to happen.