Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens

[LeoLeo]

Hi,

I have a "small issue" here . There are 2 models of the same lens, one is Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens, the other is Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Lens. the price difference is from simple to double, on most of providers, and this give me hard times. For this type of objective, is that IS "required" (read it as recommended, usefull, or so)?
I like to buy it for wildlife and also for catching my son from distance, each time when he see me nearby with my camera, become to serious and quite curious, and .... no more candid moments.

Thanks,
Leo

[Donald]

Leo

If you can afford the 'IS' then YES. It does make a huge difference. It means that you can hand-hold the camera at much slower shutter speeds and still get sharp images (I have got good images at 1/20th).

The cost differential is indeed immense. But if you can extend your budget (even if it means deferring the purchase for some months), then it will provide positive benefits.

[dragonaxe]

I.S means it has Canon's in-lens Image Stabilisation system. Unfortunately, for the type of photography you want (nature/kids), you definately want to buy the I.S if you can possibly afford it.

I can't afford it, so I use the other option.....which is stapling my kids to the floor so they can't move around so fast

[Colin Southern]

IS is a great thing for vastly reducing camera shake (so a shot that may have required 1/200th may be able to be taken at 1/25th or less) - but - keep in mind that it doesn't do anything to reduce subject motion. So if the kids are running around - and you shoot at 1/25th - you're going to get movement blur.

[LeoLeo]

Thanks alot for your answers.
I was affraid of your answers, and my first feeling was to IS. As a second option is Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, but I have big doubts about it. I'm sure there are plenty of people who use it with great results. Any thoughts for 70-300?

Regards,
Leo

[Donald]

Leo

I do not know the 70-300, so cannot comment. The 70-200 f4 L IS is a superb lens. I think the various reviews (there are many online) confirm this.

[Eric M]

Hi Leo,

I have owned or used each of the three lenses you are interested in. The non-IS 70-200 is a great lens, very sharp and well made. The 70-200f4L IS is the cream of the crop. It is very sharp, the stabilizer is amazing, has weathersealing. It also has the new, rounded aperture blades that make for some very smooth bokeh compared to the others. The 70-300IS is a good lens, but is a consumer grade product. The rotating front element, lack of full time manual focus, variable aperture and softness at the very end (300mm) end of the focal length range leave it lacking against the other two.

The 70-200f4L IS is very nearly a PERFECT lens. It is worth the extra money if you can afford it.

You didn't ask about it but the newly released 70-300 f4-5.6L IS may be a game changer for many. If it were a constant f4 aperture I would have one on preorder right now. It may correct all of the shortcommings of the consumer grade 70-300IS (except for the much higher price, of course). Time will tell.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Leo,

Look up the price of the EF70-200mm F2.8L IS USM II, and the EF70-200mm F4 IS will seem like a bargain

[Geoff F]

Is the new 70-300 L currently available in the UK?

I was considering getting the 70-200 F4 IS as an upgrade for my old 70-300 IS; which I found to be a reasonable lens for general work if you really need that extra length and don't want to carry around a converter for the 70-200.

However, before purchasing a 70-200 L IS, I thought that the new 70-300 L might be worth considering if the actual asking price is a bit more realistic than the expected release price!

But after looking at a few UK dealers, I can't find the new lens listed.

[Eric M]

Is the new 70-300 L currently available in the UK?

It was just released, so it may be a while before anyone actually has it in stock. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...4_5_6L_IS.html

[rpcrowe]

Although the extra 100mm of the new 70-300mm L lens seems tempting, it comes at a one stop cost. Since I use my 70-200mm f/4L IS as an all around general purpose and travel photography lens, the extra stop between f/4 and f/5.6 is important to me. I can shoot my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens at 1/60 second with full expectations of sharp imagery. At 1/30 second, the keeper rate goes down a bit. The 1/60 second capability with cameras which can easily shoot at 400 or even 800 ISO provides me with a workhorse lens. I would imagine that the f/stop of the new f/4-5.6L lens closes down to f/5.6 fairly early in the zoom range. F/5.6 is just not fast enugh for me...

I have just learned that the new lens is at f/5 when using 200mm. That is still too slow for my uses.

[Eric M]

The 70-200 f/4 L IS is also so very compact and lightweight. Its an amazing total package.

[LeoLeo]

Thanks to all for "sharpening the picture" . 70-200 F/4L IS is not affrodable yet ... an the new 70-300L IS USM announced for october-november comes arround 1900EUR, much higher then 70-200 F/4 IS.

Once again, thanks

Leo
PS: @ Colin: EF70-200mm F2.8L IS USM II will be an option after I will start to make PICTURES , untill then .... Your approach remainds me about my wife....allways find a bargain who ruin my budget .. maybe I should try it as well ..

[rpcrowe]

Thanks to all for "sharpening the picture" . 70-200 F/4L IS is not affrodable yet ... an the new 70-300L IS USM announced for october-november comes arround 1900EUR, much higher then 70-200 F/4 IS.

Once again, thanks

Leo
PS: @ Colin: EF70-200mm F2.8L IS USM II will be an option after I will start to make PICTURES , untill then .... Your approach remainds me about my wife....allways find a bargain who ruin my budget .. maybe I should try it as well ..

Leo...

I suggest that you either rent or borrow any of the 70-200mm f/2.8L lenses and carry it around on a few photo outings before you place that lens on a throne and pine for it.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 (series) lenses are great... There is not one of them that produces inferior imagery.

However, the f/2.8 (series) lenses are also HEAVY. They are too heavy for me to carry comfortably during a full day of walk around shooting. That certainly doesn't mean that the lens is too heavy FOR YOU TO CARRY. I just suggest that you determine if that lens will suit your style of shooting.

I seriously doubt if anyone could determine which lens shot which image, if confronted with a selection of REAL LIFE images acquired using all five of the 70-200mm cousins.

I use a Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS, along with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS as my two lens outfit on a Canon 30D and 40D. I can carry the f/4L IS AND A SECOND BODY at weight of a f/2.8L Series lens alone.

I can hand hold the f/4L IS lens in some pretty low light levels. Shooting at 1/60 second using 200mm gives me sharp imagery just about 100% of the time. When I was younger and my grip was more steady, I could have shot at an even slower shutter speed ising the f/4L IS lens.

Now, I don't know anything about the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lens that has just come on the market except that f/5.6 in a long lens (even with IS) is just too darn slow for me to hand hold.

[Gingerbaker]

Please allow me to help you rationalize the lens you really want, deep-down in your heart.

The cost of a lens is not just the purchase price. The calculation must also include the money one receives when you sell it. The resale value of Canon L lenses is really very good - it is not unusual to sell a good popular lens for more than one paid for it.

The 70-200f/4 IS will be a lot easier to sell than the non IS lens, and will likely retain more of its purchase price. Which, in the long run, makes it less expensive.

Personally, I don't see how anyone could hand hold a non IS 70-20 past 135mm and get sharp pictures except outdoors under the brightest conditions for very fast shutter speeds. I would make the argument that IS is essential for such a long focal length lens.

That is how I would explain it to my wife, at any rate.

[nodak55]

I purchased my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens. The image stabilization is worth the money. One feature that was never mentioned in the "ads" I read prior to purchasing was there are two image stabilization modes on this lens. One is for general stabilization and one mode for stabilization while panning the camera. Works like a charm for me. The lens is lighter weight for carrying around on a longer day hike or backpacking (This lens went on a 6 day backpack trip in the Wallowas of Oregon.). I have been very pleased with the results from this lens.

[LeoLeo]

Many thanks for your post gents, I do appreciate your effort. I will follow with 70-200 IS USM ( F/4; F/2.8.....will see), but my "pattience" will be hard worked . Meanwhile I will try to squize all the best from my 50mm 1.8II.
You need to be "vewy vewy quiet, when hunting wabbits!"

Leo