FLPhoto From United States of America, joined Jun 2013, 109 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2945 times:
I will be jumping to Canon here is a few days. I will get the 7D with a 24-105. I would like a Tele zoom/ prime also. I have been considering a 70-200 f4, the 70-300L, and the 300 f4 L. Which of these is my best bet? I have a plan to upgrade to full frame is a few years, so I want it to be compatible with full frame. I am not worried about weight, just IQ.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (5 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2937 times:
They are all good lenses (the 70-200 especially, given the price) but each has its strengths and weaknesses. Decide what focal lengths you will be using the most, and how much flexibility you will require, and you will go a considerable way towards answering your own question.
andrew50 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 113 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (5 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2927 times:
I have the 70-200L IS, I can't say enough about the sharpness of the lens, if 200 will be enough reach for you, to me it is a no brainer to get it, IS or not. I also have the 70-300L IS, it is sharp, but I find it not as consistent as far as sharpness as the 70-200, but the extra reach is nice.
len90 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2828 times:
I have had the 70-200 f4L for nearly 6.5 years and have loved it. Not a single problem with it. I just recently got a 70-200 f4L IS and after 3 months it was at Canon for a new USM and objectives 6 and 7. Not happy about that, but the results when those lenses work right are stunning.
Personally, if you are going full frame you will have to account for the loss in reach when you upgrade. A crop sensor in Canon is a 1.6x magnification. To help compensate I got the Canon 1.4x III TC, which is compatible with the 70-200 and pretty much every body.
Another lens a lot of people like to use for spotting is the 100-400, however I have heard people complain about sharpness dropping off in the 300-400 range on that lens.
Personally, I would advise playing with the lenses at a camera shop or even renting them so you can see what they are like before making that big purchase.
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 692 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (5 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2812 times:
Unless you want to pay silly money for the 300 f2.8 or one of the other "big whites", the 70-200 or 300 f4 are about as good as it gets. You may be able to spot a slight advantage for the 300 on the test bench, but against that the new 70-200 has a much better IS system.
Both work nicely with the 1.4 convertor. IQ is the least of your issues with either of these lenses, you can safely decide on reach vs flexibility.
angad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2766 times:
I've used the 300 f/2.8, 500f/4 and 400 f/2.8 for stuff other than spotting and I think the 300 f/2.8 is the best tele lens Canon has ever made. Shame about the price
But my regular spotting/work shooting as seen on a.net is done with a 70-200 f/4L IS, which is fantastic, and a 100-400L, which I use only because it's an affordable lens that gets me out to 400mm. It's not particularly sharp beyond 300mm and AF is not spectacular either.
Karl, of course, is right in suggesting that needs vary, but to add to that, so do budgets! In an ideal world, I'd own a 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 300 f/2.8L IS and a 500 f/4L IS, but there's a long way to go until that becomes reality, so one must balance needs, wants and wallets!
topgun3 From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2660 times:
I have the Canon 7D with a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS USM II lens which I use 80% of the time with this body. I also have a Canon 300mm F2.8 IS lens which I use on occasion. The best combination is actually my 7D + 1.4x TC II + 70-200mm. It covers almost up to the 300mm range with no noticeable difference in IQ. The only issue I would watch out for is the selection of the Teleconverter. Only one out of 3 I have tried had a pin sharp quality. The other 2 were OK, but not perfect.
The choice of the 24-105mm is also good. Very good range and very good IQ across all of zoom range. I usually have this lens on my Canon 5D mark II for wide angle shots.
My 300mm comes with me almost all the time, but I use it sparingly for far away shots. When combined with my 7D and 1.4x TC, it has a very impressive reach with adequate IQ.
Also have a Canon 70-200mm f2.8 USM non-IS lens if anyone is interested in purchasing it.