anyone using canon 70 to 200L?

[hotspur (Chris)]

I have just bought a canon 450d,and will be looking at purchasing

some lenes for it soon,i am interested in getting canon 70 to 200mm L

It comes in two versions F1.8 and F4,and then a choice of either IS

or non IS.If any one on this site has used,or owns one,and would like to

share some infomation,i would be most gratefull. I think Dennis might

have one so if you have that at astrofest,i would like to have a look at it.


Cheers Chris

[matt]

It comes in f4 and f2.8

I have the f4 IS and it's a cracker. Lighter and less expensive than the 2.8...and sharp as!

[leon]

Chris, I have done heaps of research on nearly every canon lens available and have come up with two zooms, one is the 70-200mm IS USM F/4L and the other the 70-200mm F/2.8L IS USM.

Both of these are the pick of the crop if one is looking for a moderate length zoom lens, and both are just superb, both in build and optical quality.

My choice would be the F/2.8, and if this one was used at F/4.0, you would not get a better lens in the zoom range.

Of coarse the fixed focus Canon line are the top of the line, but highly expensive.

Leon

[Tilt (Michael)]

I have the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS, I have not used any of the other versions of the Canon 70-200 (f/4, f/4 IS and f/2.8 IS) so I cannot say how they compare in the real world. But at the end of the day I can say that I've been very happy with my lens, I've used it to take some great shots. Sure its heavy, however that's something I can live with.

Michael

[acropolite (Phil)]

From anecdotal reports the F4 is slightly sharper than the 2.8 and quite a bit cheaper as well as lighter and more compact. Unless you need the speed of the F2.8, I would go with the F4. IS is a must if you're going to use the lens for terrestrial photography.

[Tilt (Michael)]

Originally Posted by acropolite

IS is a must if you're going to use the lens for terrestrial photography.

I use my non-IS lens for terrestrial photography all the time, never had a problem

Michael

[leon]

Phil, what you say is true, however stopping the F/2.8 down to F/4 I feel they would both be equally as sharp as each other, with the advantage of have a fast 2.8 when needed in low light situations.

Leon

[dpastern (Dave Pastern)]

-Well, I have an original non IS f2.8 in my arsenal. I haven't played with the IS version (sorry, I'm not a fan of IS). I have had a quick play with the f4 variant and it's pretty good.

Optically, the non IS f2.8 is by all accounts, slightly sharper than the IS version. f2.8 on the f2.8 lens, vs f4 on the f4 lens is always going to be a tad bit softer, that's just the way it works. At f4, I bet both are pretty much similar in sharpness levels. I could look at the MTF graphs from my Canon EOS lensworks book to make sure if you really want ;-)

The 70-200 f2.8 has long been regarded as one of Canon's very best lenses and I'd agree with that. It's my favourite. It's pricey, but it's very well built, very fast AF, silent AF, wonderful bokeh, very sharp and reliable. It's a pity I don't have a car Chris, otherwise I'd drive out to visit you and you could play with my lenses on your 450D.

Dave

[CometGuy]

I had a similiar descision a few years ago and went for the 70-200 2.8 non-IS over the IS. I was looking for multipurpose daylight and astronomy lens.

Some of the research I did included looking at MTF graphs supplied by Canon and also actual comparisions done by photozone, which show the non-IS lens to be sharper lens. One other thing that put me off the IS version was Jerry Lodriguss's test which showed it to be quite poor at f2.8

http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTRO...TS/C70_200.HTM

Having subsequently got the non-IS 2.8 lens I can definitely say it performs better than the lens Jerry Lodriguss tested in the link above. Thats not to say the non-IS is perfect, but it does a very good job.

Terry

[hotspur (Chris)]

Thank you Terry and David,and everyone with your helpfull advice,i am

considering all of your comments,at this stage leaning towards a NON IS

F2.8,i think these are approx $1800,

So will take my time making the decision.the non IS F4 is approx $1000

the IS F4 is approx $1600,and the IS F2.8 is approx$2200

[dpastern (Dave Pastern)]

Sometimes, f2.8 is needed. It really depends on what type of photography you do. The 70-200 @ f2.8 for modelling/portraiture, etc, works very well imho. Beautiful bokeh. If you have a f4 lens, but must use f2.8, there's nothing you can do about it. If you have a f2.8 lens, but want to use f4, you can stop down. It's better to have the ability, than not imho.

Dave

[dugnsuz (Doug)]

Hi Chris,
I have the 70-200mm f4L (non IS).
Most of the shots on my web page in my signature below were taken with this lens. I added a 1.4x Extender for a bit of extra reach with no noticeable degradation in image quality. Probably the cheapest L lens but one of the best.
Used it for both day and night use - sharp as! Never had any problems without the IS either.
Doug

[AlexN]

I've had:
70-200/2.8L IS
70-200/4L IS
70-200/4L Non-IS.

Of these, the 70-200 F/4L IS is the sharpest, and fastest to focus..
the 2.8IS was just behind, and the 4L non-IS was just behind that...

Personally, If I was to be buying one now, I'd look at the F/4 IS or the F/2.8 IS... and If I had to chose one of these, the F/4 IS is cheaper, lighter, and sharper... Its a no-brainer!

[troypiggo (Troy)]

You can save a few hundred dollars if you buy it from the more reputable US online stores, esp with the dollar pretty strong at the moment. The 70-200 f/4L is only US$599.

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

Everyone here is right. This is a great lens in whatever configuration.
I opted for the 2.8IS for two reasons:
-I (try to)do a lot of low-light photography of animals and the extra stops and IS make VERY big difference which leads to reason 2: with the f2.8 version you retain the cross-hair AF in the central point which again makes a difference if you're trying to shoot something moving in low light.
However if you are going to be mostly shooting during the day, the f4 is a fine choice. However don't reject the earlier non-IS version - they were made with fluorite and lots of lead (Pb) in the glass! Very sharp. The copy I had was the sharpest zoom I've ever seen.

[citivolus (Ric)]

I've had the 70-200L f/2.8 IS version for about 6 years now. Great lens.

Here is an interesting tidbit that many don't know: Canon warranties for digital cameras are by region, but lenses are worldwide. A foreign purchased Canon lens will have a valid warranty in Australia, and be eligible for full warranty service here.

See #4 here: http://www.canon.com.au/extend/terms.html

Canon offers an international warranty on non-digital Canon compact cameras, non-digital Canon SLR camera bodies, Canon lenses for all SLR cameras, Canon Speedlites and Canon photographic accessories only. If travelling overseas, the Customer may receive warranty service for those Products on these terms from members of the Canon Camera International Service Network. A list of those members is enclosed with the Product. The Customer must present this warranty card and the original proof of purchase to receive warranty service.

I spoke to Canon service about it last year, and their answer was that as long as the lens was purchased from an authorized dealer, and you had the purchase receipt, your warranty would be honoured. That answer was garnered by calling their Australian service line

Regards,
Eric

[hotspur (Chris)]

Thank you everyone that has replied,there are some very knowledgeable

people on this site,it was good to get some feed back on an expensive

purchase,

I have decided on the F 2.8 non IS,some kind people have offered to

let me look at their lenes,so that will be good too.

Thanks once again

Cheers Chris