Wow! Upgraded to the 70-200MM f/4 EF L IS

My new 70-200MM f/4 EF L IS arrived on Wednesday from UPS in the pouring rain. Thursday was overcast and grey...today was not much better...but off I went to give it a test drive. All I can say is Wow! This lens rivals my 135MM f/2 EF L in sharpness. The IS is awesome I am one happy camper

I sold my 70-200MM f/4 EF L to Ron (Rhilton4u)...he met me today at Hidden Pond Nature Park in Springfield to do the deal. I had the honor of selling Ron his first L lens

After the business deals were all done we took our new lenses out for a test shoot...

No ducks were out today so this little turtle guy will have to do...
Also, here is a shot of Ron proudly sporting his new L lens

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

perfect match! white lens with white shirt
Congrats! im looking fwd to my 70-200 F/4 too...

Hey - I am just debating between the 135L and the 70-200 f/4 L IS... I think you have convinced me which way to go. Is the 70-200 w/IS about the same size as the one without? Cause it doesn't look that intimidatingly large in this pic (unless Ron's a really huge guy). ;o)

Good to see I'm not the only one that is absolutely thrilled with their 70-200 F4L IS!


The IS just plain rocks! I can get razor sharp shots in HORRIBLE light at 1/3rd second. After the first few shots, I knew I was in love!

Enjoy yours! Its the cream of the crop IMO!

Mum2J&M wrote in post #3384564
Hey - I am just debating between the 135L and the 70-200 f/4 L IS... I think you have convinced me which way to go. Is the 70-200 w/IS about the same size as the one without? Cause it doesn't look that intimidatingly large in this pic (unless Ron's a really huge guy). ;o)

It is the same size but a tad bit more weight. If I were debating the 70-200MM f/4 EF L IS v. the 135MM EF L then I would pick the zoom first...gives you much more flexability. IQ for both of these lenses is awesome.

The f/4 IS version is 6.8" long and weighs 1.71 lb.
The f/4 non-IS version is also 6.8" long and weighs 1.56 lb.

Ron has his new lens mounted on a dRebel XTi

JimAskew wrote in post #3384616
It is the same size but a tad bit more weight. If I were debating the 70-200MM f/4 EF L IS v. the 135MM EF L then I would pick the zoom first...gives you much more flexability. IQ for both of these lenses is awesome.

The f/4 IS version is 6.8" long and weighs 1.71 lb.
The f/4 non-IS version is also 6.8" long and weighs 1.56 lb.

Ron has his new lens mounted on a dRebel XTi

looking good Jim. just wait till you try that baby on your new 5d !

hey Ron where's the hood !

ed rader

Hello everybody...just now caught this thread, I knew Jim was going to post it. I just got Jim's cast-off about 12 hours ago and haven't had any chance whatsoever to kick the tires. I'm working all weekend long so I'm going to have to wait until Monday to really give it a go.

I was going to hold-off on buying my first L and save up for the one Jim got, but the price was right and conditions warranted an upgrade since I've been shooting with a cheap 55-200mm at sporting events for my blog. Too bad I can't take this thing into the major league stadium - the white lens is a dead giveaway. But I should be ok at the minor league baseball parks.

I already purchased the 10-22 when I first bought the camera, so next on my agenda is to upgrade the kit lens with an L series. I'm thinking the EF 24-70...but the non-L EF-S 17-55 IS is looking awful sweet too. ARGHHH...what do you guys think of the choice between those two?

I ordered mine a week ago and should be in my hand end of August. Is going to live with Sari in the US until then and I'll pick it up when we meet in Africa. Trouble is, after using the IS I fancy her non-IS could just be lookin' for a new home Right from the first release it has looked like a superb lens so I'm sure you'll get lots of use from it Jimbo.

ed rader wrote in post #3384686
hey Ron where's the hood !

jim didn't give it to him..

Jaetie wrote in post #3386529
jim didn't give it to him..

I got the ugly hood...it was in the box laying in the car.

condyk wrote in post #3386390
I ordered mine a week ago and should be in my hand end of August. Is going to live with Sari in the US until then and I'll pick it up when we meet in Africa. Trouble is, after using the IS I fancy her non-IS could just be lookin' for a new home Right from the first release it has looked like a superb lens so I'm sure you'll get lots of use from it Jimbo.

Dave:

It is going to give my 17-55MM EF-S IS a rest for sure...after 50 or shots I have fallen in love with this thing...and I am sure you wll as well...you may have to arm wrestle Sari to get it back

Jaetie wrote in post #3386529
jim didn't give it to him..

Jaetie,

Not me...I gave Ron a brand new hood from the IS box...I have all my hoods labled for quick selection...so I elected to give him the new one But not to fear the front lens is protected...it has a B+W 010 MRC UV filter mounted on it That and a 7 year (5.5 years left) Mack Warrenty were part of the package deal.

ed rader wrote in post #3384686
looking good Jim. just wait till you try that baby on your new 5d !

hey Ron where's the hood !

ed rader

Ed,

Next March is bonus month...5D has the 1st priority...then I'll sell off the dRebel XT I played with Roeddel's 5D when we had the photo meet last Sunday...it sure is sweet...would be a nice home to the 70-200 and the 24-70 zooms

don't you love it when turtles climb trees? Even more fun when they leap from the branches and try to fly.

Great shots and congrats on the lenses guys!

KAC

JimAskew wrote in post #3386555
Jaetie,

Not me...I gave Ron a brand new hood from the IS box...I have all my hoods labled for quick selection...so I elected to give him the new one But not to fear the front lens is protected...it has a B+W 010 MRC UV filter mounted on it That and a 7 year (5.5 years left) Mack Warrenty were part of the package deal.

it was a joke. but wow, that's a really good deal that you gave to ron!

Sweet deal!