Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L  
User currently offlinedfinley From United States of America, joined May 2006, 13 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6890 times:

I might have an opportunity to buy a slightly used Canon 70-200 f4 L, but I would also have to sell my Canon 70-300mm IS USM to be able to afford it. Is this low end L lens worth selling the 70-300 mm for? I primarily use it for plane spotting.


We've flown over 3 million miles this year, most of them trying to find this place. - Foster Brooks
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineyerbol From Kazakhstan, joined Feb 2010, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6870 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I had one in the past and can say that 70-200mm F4 L is very sharp lens. It is also produce better colors than non-L lens. Fast shutter speed and your technique should give you good result. Be aware when you buy used lens. Check it properly before buying.

[Edited 2013-06-08 14:34:18]


With best regards from Almaty
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1980 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6756 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't own a Canon 70-200 f4 L, but I borroved it once from a friend, and I was very impressed with the image quality. It was better than my Canon 100-400 L, and way better than the Canon 70-300 IS USM (I have one of those, too). I would definitely sell 70-300 IS USM to buy 70-200 f4 L, no doubt about it.

User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9945 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6747 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dfinley (Thread starter):
I might have an opportunity to buy a slightly used Canon 70-200 f4 L, but I would also have to sell my Canon 70-300mm IS USM to be able to afford it. Is this low end L lens worth selling the 70-300 mm for? I primarily use it for plane spotting.

I wouldn't call the 70-200 F4L "low end". It's cheap, but you get a great lens, especially for the money.

Personally, I would say it depends on the quality of your 70-300 IS USM. Mine was too soft to use above ~250mm, so when I bought my 70-200 F4L, I was only giving up 50mm. And given the extra sharpness, I was able to crop in more anyway to make up for it. But if you need that 200-300mm range, you may want to look at other options.

FYI, I bought my 70-200 used as well. No complaints whatsoever.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 810 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6740 times:

I shoot with a 100-400L and 70-200 f/4L IS.

If I had to keep just one, I would give up the 100-400 in a heartbeat. It's slow (aperture and AF speed) and gets unusably soft above ca. 350mm. It's the lens that only gets out of the bag when I'm at air shows (which, unfortunately, is more often than not) or when I need to shoot distant subjects in good light (see: slow aperture).

The 70-200 f/4 is not a fast lens per se, but doesn't need to be stopped down for sharpness, so you can happily shoot at f/4 all day without worrying about light OR sharpness! The AF is lightning fast and, with my 50D, perfectly accurate. I don't mind losing ca. 150mm compared to the 100-400L because I gain a tonne of sharpness and a tonne of light. However, the reach does limit me to shooting ground and approach/departure shots, which does cause frequent issues with heat haze.

Also, if you're worried about buying used, don't be. I got my 70-200 brand new, but have snapped it in half twice (don't ask, I have terrible luck) and both times it's come back repaired from Canon just as good as new. Those things can take a fair amount of abuse and it (obviously) doesn't take much to get them ship-shape if they do end up being damaged.

At the end, it's like Vik said. The choice boils down to whether you want more reach or more quality.

Hope this helps

Cheers


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 732 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6713 times:

The 70-200 is a classic lens. Although relatively inexpensive, it's what L glass is all about - great colour, contrast and sharp through out the zoom range. Can be used wide open with confidence, and built to last.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineDubi From Slovenia, joined Mar 2006, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6638 times:

Do not sell 70-300, because it has IS! You will need it one day.
BTW everybody likes 70-200L.

[Edited 2013-06-16 07:51:18]

User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6633 times:

Quoting Dubi (Reply 6):
Do not sell 70-300, because it has IS!

While IS is useful at times, I can't say I miss having it. For the most part, it's not all that useful in aviation unless you want to use slow shutters regularly, eg props or panning although the lens in question doesn't have selectable axis IS (mode 1 or 2). In the main, your shutter speeds are such that it's rarely needed. I'd take better optics over IS any day.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9945 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6623 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 7):
While IS is useful at times, I can't say I miss having it.

Same here. I went without IS for about a year, with a main setup of the 17-40L and 70-200L, and there weren't many times at all that I missed it. It was also great practice.

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 7):
although the lens in question doesn't have selectable axis IS (mode 1 or 2).

You sure? My 70-300 IS USM has selectable Modes 1 and 2...



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinejaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6619 times:

The 70-300 IS does have dual IS mode - and it's the current generation IS I think, so effective for up to three stops.

I'd still swap one for a 70-200 f/4 though.

Karl


User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6588 times:

Quoting jaktrax (Reply 9):
I'd still swap one for a 70-200 f/4 though.

My mistake, I thought it was single on the non-IS lens. Even so, I agree, the 70-200 is the one I'd go for regardless as the 70-300 (non-L) is too soft at the longer end to warrant using it. What you gain optically with the 70-200 far outweights the advantaqges of IS or the extra few mm's of usable reach.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineDubi From Slovenia, joined Mar 2006, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6508 times:

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 7):
While IS is useful at times, I can't say I miss having it. For the most part, it's not all that useful in aviation unless you want to use slow shutters regularly, eg props or panning although the lens in question doesn't have selectable axis IS (mode 1 or 2). In the main, your shutter speeds are such that it's rarely needed. I'd take better optics over IS any day.

Yes, if you can have both, why sell the 70-300IS USM? Because you don't need IS, because IS is rarely needed? IS is there to help you with slow shutter. And if you already have one why sell? Keep it. I have both 70200 and 70300.
This one is 70-300 at sec/320 (IS enabled):
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Slove...d=c4269e8e668b30b9576040ea37713cb2


User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 6498 times:

Quoting Dubi (Reply 11):
sec/320

A shutter of 1/320, to be fair isn't all that slow. At a longer focal length, IS will assist but with good panning technique, isn't really needed. I was once told IS is only useful at shutters below 1/250. Faster than that, its effectiveness is limited. At wider angles, it's certainly not needed at 1/320. IS comes in to it's own with slower shutters speeds but I get around IS by using a monopod or practicing / keeping current with panning. As an example, the following was taken at 500mm at 1/80th;


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson



Unquestionably, IS would have helped, but with steady hands it's more than possible without.

The original post was one or the other due to budget constraints which is what my post was referring to. If it's possible to keep both, that would be great but if it's a question of better optics verses IS, I stand by my post that I'd take better optics over IS.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM Lens On Canon EOS posted Wed Jan 9 2013 02:04:07 by ypphluke
Need Help On Canon 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM! posted Wed Dec 19 2007 03:42:04 by Mnazarinia
Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM Review Wanted posted Thu Apr 6 2006 12:01:46 by Deaphen
New Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Wed Oct 19 2005 00:12:17 by TRVYYZ
70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM Or L Glass posted Thu Jan 3 2008 12:50:43 by Rsmith6621a
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Wed Mar 16 2005 01:57:38 by APFPilot1985
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Tue Jul 9 2002 14:59:50 by Granite
Canon 28-300 Is USM Vs. 100-400 Is USM posted Wed Sep 28 2005 19:16:27 by Stefan
Canon 70-200 L F4 Is USM posted Tue Dec 10 2002 16:34:45 by PRM
Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5,6L Is USM - Happy With It? posted Wed Jun 8 2011 13:55:41 by Jetcrazy
70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM Or L Glass posted Thu Jan 3 2008 12:50:43 by Rsmith6621a
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Wed Mar 16 2005 01:57:38 by APFPilot1985
Canon Users: 300 2.8L Is USM Vs 500 4L Is USM posted Wed Aug 21 2013 14:18:36 by Itay747
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Tue Jul 9 2002 14:59:50 by Granite
Canon Users: 300 2.8L Is USM Vs 500 4L Is USM posted Wed Aug 21 2013 14:18:36 by Itay747
Canon 28-300 Is USM Vs. 100-400 Is USM posted Wed Sep 28 2005 19:16:27 by Stefan
Canon 28-300 Is USM Vs. 100-400 Is USM posted Wed Sep 28 2005 19:16:27 by Stefan
Canon 70-200 L F4 Is USM posted Tue Dec 10 2002 16:34:45 by PRM
Canon 70-200 L F4 Is USM posted Tue Dec 10 2002 16:34:45 by PRM