70-200 f/4L IS

I'm looking really hard at this lens. I'd like to use it as a lens for shooting alpine ski racing. I already have the non-IS version (which I would sell) and really like it - great sharpness, color, contrast. If the IS version is good, then this means I can forgo carrying my monopod.

The thing is though, my non IS one is a great lens - so I'm wondering if the new version is as good, is as sharp and how good the IS is.

Anyone who has this lens and/or has used both, care to offers some guidance?

I'm not interested in the f/2.8 version, it is simply too big for what I am going to use it for.

J.

I hear its a great, great lens. IQ is on par with the non-IS version.

Ed Rader will be here soon to give ya some first hand experience.

Edit:
Have you read this thread?

https://photography-on-the.net …hp?t=237253&hig​hlight=zoo

Yep, I had read most of that thread. thanks for the link - I had missed some of the later ones.

I'm waiting for someone to say something negative about it.

that it also takes a TC so well is also a good deal for me.

This would be just about the perfect ski zoom for me.

The other side of it is that my non IS version is so great, that I'm wondering if I'd just be disappointed - i.e. hard to believe something could be better.

J.

Ed and Dante have this lens and from what I've read, Ed is completely sold out on it.

JohnJ80 wrote in post #2291906
Yep, I had read most of that thread. thanks for the link - I had missed some of the later ones.

I'm waiting for someone to say something negative about it.

that it also takes a TC so well is also a good deal for me.

This would be just about the perfect ski zoom for me.

The other side of it is that my non IS version is so great, that I'm wondering if I'd just be disappointed - i.e. hard to believe something could be better.

J.

the only harsh comments i've seen about this lens are from people who don't own it and those who feel an f4 lens is beneath them .

in fact most of the reviews that i've seen say the 70-200L f4 IS is sharper wide open than the f2.8 IS, and my copy is straight-razor sharp @ f4.

bokeh is great too. and those were my concerns: bokeh and IQ wide open.

honestly, if this lens weren't at least on par with the non-IS i probably would not keep it because i loved my 70-200L f4.

my non-IS was very sharp wide open but improved @ f5.6. given enough light i usually shot with it @ f4.5 and f 5.6.

the IS is razor sharp wide open, probably like the non-IS was at f5.6.

i've gotten some great shots with the kenko 1.4 TC. we are planning to go to carmel for the day on friday so i will try some action shots with the TC. i also have a canon 1.4 TC coming so i am going to try stacking two TCs and compare the canon against the kenko etc. etc.

stay tuned !

ed rader

JohnJ80 wrote in post #2291906
Yep, I had read most of that thread. thanks for the link - I had missed some of the later ones.

I'm waiting for someone to say something negative about it.

that it also takes a TC so well is also a good deal for me.

This would be just about the perfect ski zoom for me.

The other side of it is that my non IS version is so great, that I'm wondering if I'd just be disappointed - i.e. hard to believe something could be better.

J.

i know exactly what you mean. the doubt ate at me too.

i think what's better for sure is the f4 IS can now be used as a walkaround in almost any light.

also, i really believe IQ is improved especially wide open.

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #2292275
in fact most of the reviews that i've seen say the 70-200L f4 IS is sharper wide open than the f2.8 IS

They are very, very close, assuming good copies of each http://www.pbase.com …s/image/7012102​0/original

John, I would be confident that once you try the new f4 IS, you'd probably sell your non-IS, so long as the price differential doesn't eat at you. The non-IS is fantastic, but IS is IS.

Thanks for all that - I will be using it wide open quite a bit (sports).

Skiing shots are really difficult - not the shooting part, but the getting the equipment there part. So, a 70-200 f/4 is a requirement because of size. I've had to carry it in a backpack to date -which is much less than optimal. However, with the new TT Rotation360, many of those problems go away AND the measurements seem to say that a 5D/20D/30D will fit in the backpack part WITH a 70-200 f/4 on it held horizontally. That would be huge.

I'm pretty obsessive about support, so I have a compact monopod that i carry with me (Manfrotto 695 with a spike foot) but I think with the IS I can ditch that (my hope).

Thanks again for your guidance.

j

JohnJ80 wrote in post #2292351
Thanks for all that - I will be using it wide open quite a bit (sports).

Skiing shots are really difficult - not the shooting part, but the getting the equipment there part. So, a 70-200 f/4 is a requirement because of size. I've had to carry it in a backpack to date -which is much less than optimal. However, with the new TT Rotation360, many of those problems go away AND the measurements seem to say that a 5D/20D/30D will fit in the backpack part WITH a 70-200 f/4 on it held horizontally. That would be huge.

I'm pretty obsessive about support, so I have a compact monopod that i carry with me (Manfrotto 695 with a spike foot) but I think with the IS I can ditch that (my hope).

Thanks again for your guidance.

j

you're welcome, John. with 4-stop IS you can ditch the monopod for sure! how do you expose properly in the snow?

on bright days i have a hard time on the white sand beaches....especially with black dogs!

give me the game !

ed rader

Here is a great review of the 70-200 f/4 IS. So far it's scored a perfect 10 for overall!

I want one real bad........

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …owproduct.php?p​roduct=304

snow, beaches, etc... are just about the worst exposure problems. It is not possible to not blow something out - you just get to pick what it is blown and what isn't.

If you can get the shot so it is front lit, that helps a lot and you often need fill in flash.

What I also do is to always shoot RAW - even for sports because I get some more latitude to fix things.

I'll also often meter in advance using the spot meter aimed directly on a subject (or test subject) on my 5D and then set the camera in manual with those settings. The other thing that seems to work well, if the sun is out, is to meter using Bryan Peterson's "Blue Sky Brothers" rule - aim at the blue sky, lock the exposure, and shoot. Then, of course, bracket and shoot a lot.

I also find it really helps to have a polarizer on - more for its ND characteristics than anything else. If you can cut the light down, seems to help a lot as well.

Almost always, I have EC dialed in of +1 or more.

I also almost always use a 'cloudy' white balance even on bright sunny days. It seems to warm up the shots a lot more and keeps down the blue.

J.

JohnJ80 wrote in post #2293666
It is not possible to not blow something out - you just get to pick what it is blown and what isn't.

I beg to differ.

On th esubject of this new lens. I need a new zoom for my backup body. The non-is might get put to the back burner.

Adding the 1.4 to it makes it a perfect combo for where I shoot, beaches. Where a polarizer/cokin, a flash and partial metering will get you great results with no blown highlights.

4 stops with IS.... wow. I have the money to buy this lens but I hold off since I'm NOWHERE near a camera shop. 100-400 IS might have to be a thing of the past for me.

In bright sunlight over snow in the mountains taking pictures of dark (relatively) subjects it is very difficult to not blow something out in the frame.

How do you not do that?

J.

JohnnyG wrote in post #2292433
Here is a great review of the 70-200 f/4 IS. So far it's scored a perfect 10 for overall!

I want one real bad........

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …owproduct.php?p​roduct=304

read all those. Thanks for the link.

You guys are murder on my wallet. Can't anyone find me a reason NOT to buy one of these?

J.

It's only F4.

:P