aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:35 am

Well, I have skipped the Canon 17-40mm and 24-105mm f/4L USM lenses because the 17-85 is still good enough, and the 24-105 wasn't as good as I expected.

The 70-200mm f/4L USM is still on the list, could anybody here tell me how it is for aircraft spotting?

I've seen many nice reviews about the lens, and asked one ex that-lens shooter, and he liked the lens pretty much.

I'm wondering if it is worth the money...

I've seen somewhere that the 70-200mm f/4 is sharper than the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS and non-IS lenses, so I guess the 70-200 f/4 would be a good buy...

If anyone has test-shots taken with that lens, and is willing to show me, it would be greatly appreciated!  Smile

Thanks,
David
 
sleekjet
Posts: 2006
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2001 1:35 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:51 am

It's a fantastic lens.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim Perkins



But even after I attached a 1.4 TC, I felt like I needed more power. Unless you're blessed with close proximity at your favorite airport, you may want to bite the bullet and go for 100-400 IS.

Tim Perkins
II Cor. 4:17-18
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3177
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:03 am

Quoting Aero145 (Thread starter):
I'm wondering if it is worth the money...

100%!!

Take a look at the link through my profile: Except for the 20 oldest shots, every one of them was taken with that lens + the 1.4x (with the exception of the MD-11 arrival shot at MIA). Most were taken at 1200 x 800, but three of them were at full 1600 (and appropriately marked as such).

I guarantee you will NOT be disappointed, especially with its relatively low cost for an "L" series lens  Wink
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:20 am

Thanks Tim and Bryan for your replies!

I've tried the 2.8 IS version of the 70-200, and I was so very, very disappointed with the quality....


The Canon 70-200 f4 at f/7.1 at 150mm + Extender EF 1.4x at ISO 200... wow, what a thought. As I use most often f/11 - f/13 on my 70-300mm Canon lens... then the photos are quite sharp...

lol

Regards,
David

PS: I now know who you are, Bryan, you're Mr Peterson! I was looking at your shots today and - WOW, they were sharp!

[Edited 2006-07-03 04:21:48]
 
IL76
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 3:11 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 3):
I've tried the 2.8 IS version of the 70-200, and I was so very, very disappointed with the quality....

You think the 17-85 is good enough, a lens I've heard pretty unpleasant things about, but are disappointed with the qual of the 70-200 2.8 IS, a lens the most owners swear by???  Confused  bitelip   boggled   faint 
I don't understand... Could you explain?
 
alphafloor
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 12:36 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:10 pm

Hi Dave,

The 70-200 f/4L USM is a marvel. Lightweight, the autofocus is fast and silent, there is no IS but at least it saves battery life. I'm really happy with it !! Here are the pictures I got here in anet all taken with this lens.

Regards,
Alejandro

[Edited 2006-07-03 11:40:58]
Whatever
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:19 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 3):
I've tried the 2.8 IS version of the 70-200, and I was so very, very disappointed with the quality....

I think what people forget is that there appears to be a variability with this particular lens. Most examples are excellent, but I have see several bad examples.

I swear by my 70-200 f2.8IS, and in comparing it to other L lenses, I can only say that it is simply the best zoom Canon currently produces (the good examples that it)...

That said, the 70-200 f4.0L is an absolutely brilliant lens, and worth every cent you pay for it.

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:50 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 3):
I've tried the 2.8 IS version of the 70-200, and I was so very, very disappointed with the quality....

Then either you did something wrong or the lens was a dud. The 2.8 is generally considered the best canon zoom around.

I've shot with both the f/4 and 2.3 and there is a difference. Although I haven't really compared sharpness, as both seem fairly equal, the 2.8 is just a better performer. Brighter viewfinder, finer handling, faster AF. If I had to choose I'd go with the 2.8, also works better with converters. If budget does not allow you can't reallg go wrong wiith the f/4 either.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:12 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 3):
I've tried the 2.8 IS version of the 70-200, and I was so very, very disappointed with the quality....



Quoting Aero145 (Thread starter):
the 24-105 wasn't as good as I expected.

Seems like you got several bad copies shipped to Iceland then  biting 
Jet Visuals
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:05 pm

Yep, I've tried bad copies.

I've seen more than once, and people have been talking about, that the 70-200 f/4 is said sharper than the 2.8 versions of Canon. I know the 2.8's have faster autofocus and bigger aparture, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're sharper.

I have seen much more of sharper photos from Canon 70-200 f/4 and Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 than from Canon 70-200 f/2.8 and Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS...

Very strange.

Maybe that's the aparture of the 2.8's that make them so expensive.  Smile

-David
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3177
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:16 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 9):
Maybe that's the aparture of the 2.8's that make them so expensive.

 checkmark 

Which is why a 100-400 f/2.8L IS would be so outrageously expensive...
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:21 pm

Haha yes.  Smile

But - I can't see better than your combo shots with 70-200 f4 are sharper than most 70-200 2.8 shots...

-David
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:34 pm

David,

As tested by Canon, and thousands of magazines, websites and users, the 70-200 2.8 is definitely sharper than the 70-200 f4.

It's a fact, as easy as that. There are good and bad copies of both lenses, of course, but still... 2.8 over f4, hands down.

Florian
Jet Visuals
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3177
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:43 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 11):
But - I can't see better than your combo shots with 70-200 f4 are sharper than most 70-200 2.8 shots...

David, bear in mind that those are all finished products, which included resizing and a few rounds of USM. The truth about the lenses themselves really lies in the originals...
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 9:52 pm

100-400 sharper than the 70-200?, don't make me laugh. I own both and the 70-200 blows the 100-400 away in terms of sharpness.

If people get sharper results from the 100-400 they're doing something wrong.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:09 pm

Can you show me shots from your 100-400 - and 70-200, Tim?

Quoting INNflight (Reply 12):
It's a fact, as easy as that. There are good and bad copies of both lenses, of course, but still... 2.8 over f4, hands down.

I've seen many press photographers holding the 2.8, but 2.8 IS.

If there would be an IS version of the f4, it would probably be as popular as the 2.8 IS. It would be lighter, and nicer to carry.

@Bryan: Well, then your shots are well edited.  Wink

I've been looking for very sharp 70-200 2.8 shots, but I haven't found them yet...

But, I've found very sharp 70-200 f4 and 100-400 shots...

Maybe, the shots out of 2.8 haven't been very well edited, as the 100-400 and 70-200 f4 shots...

But oh well - I don't need the 2.8 - as I will never use that aparture.  Smile I also doubt I will use the 4.0 aparture on the 70-200 f4.  Smile

-David
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:12 pm

Quoting IL76 (Reply 4):
Could you explain?

Yes: I have a good copy of the 17-85, and have tried bad copies of the 70-200 2.8's. If you want, I could send you one or two orginals from the 17-85, and one or two orginals from the 70-200 2.8 IS.

-David
 
IL76
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:15 pm

Hmmm... Tough one... Who to believe? David or Tim ((co-)owner of 70-200 f4, 70-200 f2.8 and 100-400)... Ouch, my brain hurts. So...  boggled  difficult...  faint 
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:21 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 15):
I've seen many press photographers holding the 2.8, but 2.8 IS.

LoL.... sorry David, but it gets out of hand. I freelance for two local newspapers, and trust me, the 70-200 2.8 IS for sure is - hands down - the most-frequently used lens.

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 15):
If there would be an IS version of the f4, it would probably be as popular as the 2.8 IS

No. The lens is not popular because of Image Stabilisation, it is popular because of the 2.8 aperture!

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 15):
as I will never use that aperture.

Midday-sunshine aviation photographer heh?

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 16):
I could send you one or two originals from the 17-85, and one or two originals from the 70-200 2.8 IS.

Please don't send them to him - link them in this thread...  

edit: quote was wrong

[Edited 2006-07-03 15:26:26]
Jet Visuals
 
eddl
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:54 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:23 pm

The 70-200/4 is a great lens ... for my backup camera. Big grin

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

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:27 pm

Quoting INNflight (Reply 18):
Midday-sunshine aviation photographer heh?

I guess so Florian. I guess David would be happy with an f/8 lens. A 2.8 lense will perform much better than a 5.6 lens at say f5.6. Now with low light which lens would you prefer?

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:30 pm

Quoting IL76 (Reply 17):
Hmmm... Tough one... Who to believe? David or Tim ((co-)owner of 70-200 f4, 70-200 f2.8 and 100-400)... Ouch, my brain hurts. So... boggled difficult... faint

I'm getting tired of your teasing.

Quoting INNflight (Reply 18):
LoL.... sorry David, but it gets out of hand. I freelance for two local newspapers, and trust me, the 70-200 2.8 IS for sure is - hands down - the most-frequently used lens.

INNflight:

"I've seen many press photographers holding the 2.8, but 2.8 IS."

I was saying this!!

Quoting INNflight (Reply 18):
No. The lens isn't that popular because of Image Stabilisation, it's popular because of the 2.8 aperture!

OK - bokeh...  Yeah sure

I know of course that you can have faster shutter speeds, but I just never shoot with such a big aparture!

Quoting INNflight (Reply 18):
Midday-sunshine aviation photographer heh?

No - that's not existing here in Iceland - at least at the summers. If there are no clouds, there is sunshine 24 hours.  Wink But in the winter, yes I'm a midday-sunshine aviation photographer. I'm not trying to win Javier G. in the panning shots at the evenings...  Smile

Quoting INNflight (Reply 18):
Please don't send them to him - link them in this thread...

Three 20D orginals, about 3MB each, and one 5D orginal, about 6MB I think.

How can I link such big images??

-David
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:32 pm

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 20):
Now with low light which lens would you prefer?

The Canon EF 85mm 1.2L II USM.  Wink

But seriously, I do not shoot in low light. If I would do that, I would have planned to buy the 2.8.  Wink
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:41 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 22):
I would have planned to buy the 2.8.

Christmas is a long way to go... oh, gotta scribble my wishlist for mommy.

Do you actually buy them, or get them?

Don't take it personally David, but you're posting like you are a 30-year old photographer that is familiar with the pro's and con's of the entire lineup.

I'd say slow down a bit, learn and hear what experiences members say. That's the way I started, that's the way you'll get the most out of the knowledge.
Jet Visuals
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3177
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:43 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 15):
I also doubt I will use the 4.0 aparture on the 70-200 f4.

When the sun's at its low point on the horizon (probably reminiscent to our dawn / dusk), you'll need it.

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 21):
Three 20D orginals, about 3MB each, and one 5D orginal, about 6MB I think.

http://www.filecabin.com

Accepts anonymous uploads up to 5.572 MB.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:45 pm

I've answered you in IM, don't think I am going to answer this here.

I have slowed down very much in the past... just to let you know.

And - I'm not going to buy the 2.8.

-David

PS: Florian, I respect your words, but I was starting this thread to hear what other members think of the 70-200 f4. I see that many are happy, but most of the members have gone to 2.8 because of the bigger aparture and IS. This is the cheapest L-glass, and it's better than my other lenses, so I am going to buy it. I will slow down more, and stop this lens threads. This is my second (of real lenses) and both have made me think that 'this is a good buy'.

[Edited 2006-07-03 15:49:18]

[Edited 2006-07-03 15:53:45]
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:48 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 25):
And - I'm not going to buy the 2.8.

Nobody here is pushing you to do so, but you imply you are buying the f/4 because it is a better lens than the f/2.8 which it isn't, and that's why several photographers participate in this thread.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:51 pm

I didn't say that the f4 is a better lens. I've tried bad copies of the 2.8's, and I'm surprised. I've seen on the net very many good photos taken with the 2.8, but fewer on this site.
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:28 pm

Anyone mentioned price? lol the f4 is a cracking lens. You WILL use f4. Even just because you'll have it! Big apertures doesnt always mean bokeh. Obvioulsy depends on focal length, but yes, your DOF will on occassions be very tight. I recently shot a kickboxing event in very poor arena conditions and the 2.8 was a god send. Anyway the f4 is a very nice lens, it will serve you well. If used to its full potential like any lens.

Regards
Colin  Smile
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:32 pm

Here are orginals:

http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151934764-IMG_8638.JPG

This was taken with the 17-85 on 20D, aparture 9, ISO 100, 1/320th, 33mm.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151935519-IMG_8737.JPG

This was taken with the 17-85 on 20D, aparture 10, ISO 100, 1/500th, 64mm.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151936157-IMG_8990.JPG

This was taken with the 70-200 f/2.8 on 20D, aparture 10, ISO 100, 1/640th, 70mm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151936814-_MG_4506.JPG

This was taken with the 70-200 f/2.8 on 5D, aparture 2.8, ISO 100, 1/40th, 90mm.

-----------



Regards,
David  Smile

PS: I'll just go for this lens: http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151937...0da4$eb2e5e40$4201a8c0@aero145.jpg

Nah, just kidding.  Wink


PS2: The 500L pic was taken at a camera store in Paris, that's my camera body, I tried this 500 f/4L; man, too heavy!
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:43 pm

David, shots with the 70-200 f2.8 are out of focus - blurry. Quite clearly to me

Regards
Colin  Smile
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:48 pm

Strange, as of the red aircraft.

I was once panning the same aircraft as on the 5D photo with my 70-300 IS at 1/100 at 300mm (x1.6), and the photo was sharp.

The red aircraft was still, 90mm full frame, 1/40...

Looks like the f/2.8 aparture isn't a good use... as of this example of lens...

However, here's a sharp photo taken with the exactly same example of body and lens:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sigurdur Benediktsson - AirTeamImages



-David

[Edited 2006-07-03 16:49:09]
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:52 pm

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 31):
Looks like the f/2.8 aparture isn't a good use... as of this example of lens...

Sorry David, but now you clearly don't know what you're talking about anymore. The fact that the image is blurry has nothing to do with the lens being used at 2.8. You simply didn't hold the camera steady enough + the tail seems to have been moving? during the exposure which would explain the heavier blur on the tail.

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 31):
I was once panning the same aircraft as on the 5D photo with my 70-300 IS at 1/100 at 300mm (x1.6), and the photo was sharp.

Longer focal lenghts generally allow for lower shutterspeeds without blurring the aircraft due to speed of motion.

Tim

[Edited 2006-07-03 16:53:38]
Alderman Exit
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:57 pm

Thanks for this, Tim.

I was probably hand-shaky then, but the plane was still.

Here's the photo I was talking about, the 300mm shot.

http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151938524-IMG_8927.JPG

-David

PS: Wouldn't it be a good idea to talk more about the 70-200 f/4, get its cons. I don't want to talk about the 70-200 2.8 more, it's not what I need...

[Edited 2006-07-03 17:02:09]
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 12:00 am

Search the forum, there was a good thread explaining this in detail a while ago.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
ua935
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:41 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:44 am

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 15):
I've been looking for very sharp 70-200 2.8 shots, but I haven't found them yet...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Glenn Stewart





Looks pretty damn sharp to me.

What you also need to remember is that although you may never use a lens at F2.8 or F4 the camera will use the maximum aperture for focusing so a 2.8 will always be quicker at focusing.

If you want to look at reviews for both lenses visit www.fredmiranda.com.

With the number of reviews over there you will get an good cross section of reviews but please EF 70-200 F4 better than EF 70-200 F2.8, never. Give up.

Simon
Live every second like you mean it
 
dullesguy
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2000 12:12 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:46 am

I've tried out the 70-200L f2.8 IS on my 300D and used it at full zoom and the image was clear clear clear! Every lense has a downside, you've just gotta find what will work for you. Budget, telephoto length, aperture, etc. The 70-200L F4 is just about as good as the 2.8 version, and for our hobby its ALMOST identical. But if you're gonna use it for low light and for other thing such as portraits or just general photography i'd really go for the 2.8 version. Its better optical quality and that IS really comes in handy. The overall downside of these lenses for me is the telephoto length and thats why i'm saving up for the 100-400L lense. Yea you could get a 1.4x for the 70-200, but remember you loose f-stops when doing that, so the wonderful 2.8 goes bye bye when using the converter. Honestly the ultimate combo would be 70-200 and the 100-400L. As its been said already, the price for the 70-200L F4 is unbeatable, and you can't really ask for much more than what you get for that price. The saying "you get what you pay for" is pretty much true.


Stephen
"..the joy of the Lord is your strength" Nehemiah 8:10
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:39 am

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 31):
Looks like the f/2.8 aparture isn't a good use...

 Embarrassment

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 29):
aparture 9, ISO 100, 1/320th, 33mm.



Quoting Aero145 (Reply 29):
aparture 10, ISO 100, 1/640th, 70mm

When comparing lenses you should generally use M mode and the SAME settings with the same focal length... just for future threads.
Jet Visuals
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:46 am

Quoting UA935 (Reply 35):
Looks pretty damn sharp to me.

Yep I agree. However, Glenn got a little un-luck, heat-haze.

However, cool photograph.  Smile

Thanks otherwize for the info!

Quoting DullesGuy (Reply 36):
I've tried out the 70-200L f2.8 SA) and Eagle Air/Arnaflug (Iceland)">IS on my 300D and used it at full zoom and the image was clear clear clear! Every lense has a downside, you've just gotta find what will work for you. Budget, telephoto length, aperture, etc. The 70-200L F4 is just about as good as the 2.8 version, and for our hobby its ALMOST identical. But if you're gonna use it for low light and for other thing such as portraits or just general photography i'd really go for the 2.8 version. Its better optical quality and that SA) and Eagle Air/Arnaflug (Iceland)">IS really comes in handy. The overall downside of these lenses for me is the telephoto length and thats why i'm saving up for the 100-400L lense. Yea you could get a 1.4x for the 70-200, but remember you loose f-stops when doing that, so the wonderful 2.8 goes bye bye when using the converter. Honestly the ultimate combo would be 70-200 and the 100-400L. As its been said already, the price for the 70-200L F4 is unbeatable, and you can't really ask for much more than what you get for that price. The saying "you get what you pay for" is pretty much true.

Very good post, thanks for that!

Quoting INNflight (Reply 37):
When comparing lenses you should generally use M mode and the SAME settings with the same focal length... just for future threads.

Thanks Florian.

-David
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:21 am

Quoting DullesGuy (Reply 36):
Honestly the ultimate combo would be 70-200 and the 100-400L

Sorry but "no"....

The 100-400's capabilities are over-estimated by the majority here.
I'm not saying it's not good, it's just not that incredible as everybody says.

Florian
Jet Visuals
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:24 am

Florian.

Though your 70-200 2.8 is more incredible than the 100-400, the 100-400 is for example incredible on a 350D body if the owner has just gone from a little compact camera.

I would like the 100-400 more than the 70-200 2.8 because of the short zoom range of the 70-200...

But, as you have experience, 70-200 2.8 is better...

 Smile

-David
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:29 am

I'm not saying which one is better, I just claim (from my personal 2-year 100-400L experience) that it's by far not THAT incredible.

Of course it's stunning if you came from a point and shoot recently, but to be honest, unless you want to bump ISO constantly, it's a sunshine lens. Use it in low light or for fast action, it's not that nice.

Granted though, for aviation it's excellent most of the time.
Jet Visuals
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:16 am

OK...

It's like this then?

100-400: sunshine lens
70-200 f4: sunshine lens
70-200 f2.8: evening lens
70-200 f2.8 IS: night lens

 Smile

-David
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:32 am

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 29):
http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151934764-IMG_8638.JPG
This was taken with the 17-85 on 20D, aparture 9, ISO 100, 1/320th, 33mm.

Loads of color fringing which is typical for the 17-85 and just of one the common problems.

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 29):
http://www.filecabin.com/up1/1151936814-_MG_4506.JPG
This was taken with the 70-200 f/2.8 on 5D, aparture 2.8, ISO 100, 1/40th, 90mm.

A setting which requires the max from both equipment and photographer and with a bit more experience you would not have used it.
On modern DSLR's(for sure the 5D) it is no problem to turn up the ISO somewhat, I have no problem(20D) using ISO 400 or even 800 if I have to.
I am surprised by the amount of light fall off though which is another reason not to use this lens wide open on a full frame camera.
On the 20D it probably goes unnoticed.

Quoting UA935 (Reply 35):
What you also need to remember is that although you may never use a lens at F2.8 or F4 the camera will use the maximum aperture for focusing so a 2.8 will always be quicker at focusing.

And not only that but it will also lock on in situations where the F4 has to head for home.

Quoting Aero145 (Thread starter):
Well, I have skipped the Canon 17-40mm and 24-105mm f/4L USM lenses because the 17-85 is still good enough, and the 24-105 wasn't as good as I expected.

Are you sure we are talking about photography here ?
The 17-40/4 is probably one of the best zoom's Canon ever produced(in many situations even better then the 16-35/2.8) and the 17-85 the worst.
I did post some concerns about the 24-105 albeit in another context.
Which was(and is) that I think it does not live up to its price tag, still it can't be compared in anyway with the 17-85.

Willem
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:41 am

Willem.

I was saying that I don't need any better short lens than 17-85. It is still good for me.

I've tried the 24-105, and I was unhappy with the results. As said earlier in this thread, I could have got a bad example.

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 43):
with a bit more experience you would not have used it.

That is right. I had not any experience with the 5D and 70-200, actually not with the 20D either, so I used always the biggest aperture...

-David

PS: 17-85 isn't the worst, are we talking about 18-55 as an L-lens or what?
PS2: Could you explain for me colour fringing?

[Edited 2006-07-03 21:42:52]

[Edited 2006-07-03 21:43:29]

[Edited 2006-07-03 21:44:59]
 
dullesguy
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2000 12:12 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:44 am

Quoting INNflight (Reply 39):

ok let me rephrase. the perfect combo for ME would be 70-200 2.8 IS and 100-400L.

Quoting INNflight (Reply 41):

could you expand a bit more??


i cant get enough of these posts as i'm considering these lenses as well. my main concern is having too much zoom or too little zoom so i want both..but income wont allow that. i really have to just wait and see where im gonna get placed at for my job to know where ill be taking pics the most to see if i need rhe zoon or what.
"..the joy of the Lord is your strength" Nehemiah 8:10
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:11 am

David I don't want to sounds condescending or anything but maybe you want to get a little more experience under your belt before rating those lenses. You say you didn't like the 70-200, yet when seeing the shot the disappointing results are your own fault and not the lens'. Now every lens you seem to use is a bad example which seems a bit unrealistic...

I have used all lenses mentioned extensively and even I wouldn't dare to rate them beyond anything but the obvious. Professional lens tests are what you're looking for.

Tim

[Edited 2006-07-03 22:12:55]
Alderman Exit
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:31 am

Every lens I seem to use bad?

Well, no.

My 70-300 IS, 17-85 IS, and 75-300 II are good, so is my Friend's 70-300 DO, 18-55 and 50 1.8.

Maybe I've experienced this lenses much, so I know every bit of them, and I do not with the 2.8s... I think that could explain why the 70-200 2.8s and 24-105 weren't good. But however, the shots I took with the 24-105 were so disappointing. Much more than the 2.8s.

And another thing here: As I've seen many good shots taken with the 70-200 f4 on an 1.4 extender, would the 1.4 extender be a good buy for the 70-200?

Thanks,
David

PS: Explains more... When I was trying my 70-300 for the first time, the same day I got it into my hands, the photos weren't as good as from my 75-300 II.  

[Edited 2006-07-03 22:33:04]
 
sulman
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:37 am

The 70-200 F4 L works very nicely with the 1.4 extender. It's been discussed extensively here.


James
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: The Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L USM

Tue Jul 04, 2006 6:15 am

Oh.  Wow! I haven't seen that, though I've searched, thanks James!

Regards,
David  Smile

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests