Aer Lingus
Topic Author
Posts: 1217
Joined: Sun May 14, 2000 4:06 am

Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 4:41 am

I've heard so many good things bout this lens that Im quite eager to see some results and opinions from contributors here. Im considering buying this next summer when I have the cash so, their isnt a huge rush on here. Its amazing how I started out in this photography hobby, initially just to catalogue aircraft that I see but now im moving out into everythigng photography and I can't get enough of it so this is a long term buy im looking at not just to use for aircraft but everything else. Its about €750 online and im wondering how Canon put an L lens on the market for that price!

So any comments are welcome.

Thanks,
Martin
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 4:42 am

martin,

are you talking about the F4? or the 2.8? Both are very good lenses, very sharp. The 2.8 is one of the things I want this year...

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
Aer Lingus
Topic Author
Posts: 1217
Joined: Sun May 14, 2000 4:06 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 4:43 am

Sorry was a little vague there in the lens im talking about. Im on about the
Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM

 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 5:03 am

I think the 4 is pretty much the same as the 2.8 optics wise.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 5:23 am

Dont think it is really the same, but quality might be comparable. 2.8 glass has a much larger surface offcourse. But I think you knew that and meant the quality  Smile...

great, lens, and the F4 is very sharp and reasonably cheap for the quality you get. Allthough being a stop slower then the 2.8, still quite a fast lens.

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 5:55 am

I had one and its a fine lens - traded it in for the 2.8 version with IS as I have a need for low light capability, but optically, I can't detect a difference - both are sharp as a tack.

I guess the low (!) price is due to the difficulting in shifting units due to the 2.8 IS - definitely worth the money. Works very well with the 1.4 extender as well.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
vaman
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2000 12:27 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 10:17 am

The F/4 only contains 2ud elements


the F/2.8 has 4ud elements. THe more the merrier.


THe 2.8 is on my wish list

L
 
Craigy
Posts: 1076
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2001 6:24 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 10:23 pm

Martin,

Remember an L lens is not just about image quality, it is build quality, durability, environmental protection. The focising is extremely fast and the f4 is also very light to carry. I would not change mine for anything else remotely in the price range.

Read these reviews if you haven't already.

http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_84503_3128crx.aspx

Regards,
Craig.
 
Singapore 777
Posts: 980
Joined: Sat May 29, 1999 3:00 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 10:46 pm

Heh guys, are you talking about the difference between these 2 lens? (click the link below)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=800657868
and
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=800201772

Can you tell me more about the difference between them? Is it that the L lens has Image Stabilizer and the other doesnt?
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:05 pm

No, the 75-300 is not an L lens - different class (optics, build altogether)

The 70-200mm illustrated doesn't have IS - it is the old model now superceded. So there are in fact 3 Canon 70-200mm L lenses floating around -

70-200 f4 - no IS, very good quality and (relatively) light and compact

70-200 f2.8 no IS - 1 stop faster but bigger and heavier

70-200 f2.8 IS - supercedes the older model - has the latest Canon IS (good for the equivalent of 3 fstops)

All are white L lenses, and look superficially similar - if buying online/mailorder, do check and double check exactly which model is being sold - the latest 2.8 IS should probably cost about 3x the current price of the f4, so be wary of any apparent bargains!

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
jettrader
Posts: 580
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:52 pm


Martin,

There is one of these on eBay now going for 375 GBP if you use the "BuyNow" option...

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=801916596

I paid £475 for mine in a local store - I reckon 375 is a steal!

Regards,
Dean
Life's dangerous. Get a f**king helmet!
 
User avatar
Jofa
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 9:50 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:46 am

Ckw
"traded it in for the 2.8 version with IS"
Can you post sample pics taken with your 70-200 f2.8 IS and perhaps also with the 1.4 converter attached.
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:00 am

Jofa - well here's a shot with the 70-200


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Colin K. Work



I don't have any here with the 1.4 attached - in fact I don't use the 70-200 much at all for aviation photography - I'm lazy and the 100-400 is so much more flexible, if not as sharp.

However, I'm looking at rationalising my system some to release funds for a 2nd D60 - I have a degree of redundancy in my current lens outfit, so I was planning (if the weather's good) to do a comparison between the 70-200, 300, and 100-400 and various convertor combinations. I'll make the results available.

I'm hoping that I find I can afford to trade in the 100-400 and use the 300 and 70-200 with the 1.4 convertor to cover the 100-400 range without sacrificing quality. I've decided that much as I love the 100-400, a 2nd body would be more useful. Furthermore, once I have some digital backup I can feel comfortable selling my EOS 3 which is acting as backup now, but is really just gathering dust.

Cheers,

Colin

Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
jettrader
Posts: 580
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:01 am

Further to my earlier post...it's gone! Too late!

At that price...and judging by the buyers rating I'd say a dealer snapped it up.  Sad

Life's dangerous. Get a f**king helmet!
 
User avatar
Jofa
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 9:50 am

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Sat Nov 16, 2002 3:03 am

Ckw
Thanks for posting the image, and yeah, such a comparison would be interesting.
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Sat Nov 16, 2002 6:10 am

All of the photos in this gallery were shot with the 70-200L f4 except one. Most of them had a cheap 2x converter attached as well. I think it is a fine lens for outdoor shooting and even indoor shooting with a flash. It is very durable, lightweight, and sharp as anything I have seen. The 2.8 IS version would be nice, but for 1300 dollars more, it should be nicer! I may be selling mine here shortly, but only because I need a longer lens consistently and so I'm looking to get the 100-400 IS from Canon. If anyone is in the market for a used 70-200L f4 in perfect condition I might be able to sell to you in the U.S. Not a sure thing yet, but if you are interested let me know.

http://www.pbase.com/mistereman/airshow


-Ken
 
mikey
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 1999 4:04 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Sat Nov 16, 2002 8:57 am

I have the 70-200L f4. This the cheapest L-lense that you can buy. It is great for taking pictures taken through a fence since the focusing is done inside the lense.

Mike
Ex LAX, LGB, SNA aviation photographer
 
pepef
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 3:12 pm

RE: Canon EF 70-200mm L

Mon Nov 18, 2002 12:04 am

I also had the 70-200 f/4 L. Very good picture quality.If you plan on carrying anything else with you, forget the f/2.8. It is too heavy.
Also, you won't be taking many pictures at f/2.8, so the f/4 will be sufficient.

But if you are going to get a converter as well, why not just get the EF 100-400 L, the price difference isn't huge, especially if you get one secondhand.

Lens quality tests, all makes, a must for a buyer:
http://www.photodo.com/, once there, press products, then Canon

Peter

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests