I Need Range!

My next purchase i s gonna be a telephoto lens. I am poor, so I gotta keep it under 600 bux. I think i have narrowed my choices down to-

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens or,

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens

they are roughly the same price, and I can probly get them second hand even cheaper. The thing is, is that I dont have the steadiest hand in the world, so I can probly benefit a little from the IS at thoses ranges, but I have read that the IS lens is a little slow. I also have read great things about the L lens, but like I said i dont have the steadiest hands in the world. It wil be coupled with an XTi, if that makes any difference in opinions.

The shots I will most likely be taking are Nature, People, the occasional outdoor Sports games, and maybe some indoor school events(not enough to be a huge factor though).

Are these my best options for what I want/need or is there something else in that price range that I should be looking at?

70-200 f/4 hands down.

I agree, get a used EF 70-200/4 and a monopod if you are unsteady.

The 70-300 is your best bet at that price range with IS. If you want the 70-200L f/4 with IS, it will be around $1000.

The 70-200 is definitely the better lens, no question.

However, the 70-300 might be better for your needs. If you're willing to sacrifice IQ, constant f/4 aperture, and build quality to gain IS and 100mm more reach, then the 70-300 might be something to consider.

Here are reviews on both:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com ….0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Another vote for the 70-200 f/4 for several reasons:

1. If you resell at some point it will likely retain better value than the 70-300.
2. It is a better piece of glass, hands down, no contest.
3. IS is nice but a monopod will make up for some of that and IS doesn't stop moving objects (at least not yet!!).
4. The 70-200 works reasonably well with a 1.4x extender.
5. The 70-200 comes with a hood and case; if you will be using a tripod I don't think it comes with a tripod ring but the f/4 is not nearly as heavy as the f/2.8 version.

Honestly, if IS is a deal breaker I'd STILL get the 70-200 f/4.

Both are very good optics with the edge to the L. See my comparo here http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/70300s

Every lens choice is a compromise of sorts. You may want to go with the L and add this $1 "IS" unit [Seriously...]

http://www.metacafe.co​m …y_camera_lose_t​he_tripod/

RolandMel wrote in post #4815688
My next purchase i s gonna be a telephoto lens. I am poor, so I gotta keep it under 600 bux. I think i have narrowed my choices down to-

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens or,

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Auto Focus Telephoto Zoom Lens

they are roughly the same price, and I can probly get them second hand even cheaper. The thing is, is that I dont have the steadiest hand in the world, so I can probly benefit a little from the IS at thoses ranges, but I have read that the IS lens is a little slow. I also have read great things about the L lens, but like I said i dont have the steadiest hands in the world. It wil be coupled with an XTi, if that makes any difference in opinions.

The shots I will most likely be taking are Nature, People, the occasional outdoor Sports games, and maybe some indoor school events(not enough to be a huge factor though).

Are these my best options for what I want/need or is there something else in that price range that I should be looking at?

I went through this exact choice recently, and I chose the 70-300. The 70-200 has some advantages, as people above have already mentioned. However, I chose the 70-300 because I wanted IS and the extra 100mm. The 70-300 also has a second IS mode for panning, which is great for me because I sometimes shoot motorsports. The IS also makes it possible for me to get pretty good handheld shots at the long end. I've been able to get some great car racing shots panning at 300mm HANDHELD. My percentage of good shots would definitely be higher with a monopod, but the IS is a huge advantage when you don't have or want to bring a monopod. The extra 100mm has also been great. One other thing is that my intended use for this lens is for outdoors, during the day, so giving up the f/4 isn't a big deal for me.

No right answer, and both are good lenses, but the 70-300 fit my needs better.

I like it! http://www.metacafe.co​m/watch/104194...se_th​e_tripod/

I went through the same process and chose the 70-300 over the 70-200 hands down. IQ is good on both, 200mm is not very long at all, you'll be surprised. IS is great, but the biggest letdown for me was the autofocus speed of the 70-300 and the lack of full time manual focusing. That's why I sold it yesterday. But I still wouldn't get a 70-200 f/4 to replace it. I'm grabbing a 200mm f/2.8 prime instead because it's cheap, faster, and will take T-Cons better than an f/4 lens, but primes are not for everyone.

If it's reach you want, the 70-300 is the better choice, especially with the IS. For nature and wildlife, the 70-300 with the IS and more reach is the better lens. Mode 2 IS for panning is SWEET.

My advice - go to the store, try both. You'll see how short 200mm is there.

It's a tossup. I got lots of keepers because of IS that I wouldn't have gotten otherwise, but I also lost a lot of shots because of the lack of FTM and the AF speed, when it hunts, it hunts through a LONG range. 200mm at f/4 without IS is too short and slow though.

Both about the same price, both good lenses, as mentioned, resale value of L will be better (if it ever comes to that), the 70-200 is a faster lens, but the 70-300 has abit more range. Neither lens will be great for indoors, not fast enough, so will need to bump up the ISO....It really down to what you want, i.e. extra range or faster optics....

Nothing else of note really in that price range, if you willing to hold off and save abit more there the sigma 100-300mm f4, brilliant lens for less than $1000.

You need range. The 300mm has range.

You are poor and have shakey hands. Granted the lenses are priced about the same, but one of them has IS which stands for (I SHAKE).

If you need more light, bump up the I.S.O which stands for (I SHAKE OFTEN).

One of them is the winner here, wonder which one

Good luck

Thanx for the advice!

Right now I am heavily leaning towards the 70-300mm IS.

I already own a 28-135 IS, so my thinking is that with the 70-200mm lens, 65mm of more more reach is not going to add that much to what I already have. I am still learning, so this will a good starter telephoto for me.

Now its time to start hunting for a used copy!

RolandMel wrote in post #4830229
Thanx for the advice!

Right now I am heavily leaning towards the 70-300mm IS.

I already own a 28-135 IS, so my thinking is that with the 70-200mm lens, 65mm of more more reach is not going to add that much to what I already have. I am still learning, so this will a good starter telephoto for me.

Now its time to start hunting for a used copy!

...nothing but a massive improvement in IQ but if that's not important to you then you are correct .

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #4830242
...nothing but a massive improvement in IQ but if that's not important to you then you are correct .

ed rader

who doesnt think IQ is important? Im just a guy that likes to go out and take pictures. When i first got my XTi i was blown away with what kind of pics I could take with the kit lens, people seem to bash it all the time...I just dont see it yet thru my newb eyes, then again I am not a stickler for perfection, I just like to go out and have fun.

Im am still on the high from the massive improvement of IQ from POS cameras! I guess whichever one I can find first and cheapest, will probly be my next purchase....I just missed one on CL last week, so gotta keep looking.