|Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 1):|
Yes. Absolutely. It's one of the most recommended lenses on this forum. In fact the only lens recommended more is probably the non IS version due to its amazing quality and affordability.
200mm might fall short in certain situations but generally it's good enough.
The 24-105 is a great general purpose lens for traveling and stuff. Maybe go for the 70-200 f/4 (non-IS) and put the rest towards a 24-105. Can't go wrong!
|Quoting Andrew50 (Reply 3):|
I have the 70-200 f4/L IS also, and believe me it is everything it is advertised to be for sure. An incredible sharp lens! I purchased a 70-300L IS when that lens came out and since then have rarely used the 70-200. My 70-300 is almost as sharp as the 70-200 even at 300mm, which I have heard on this forum it has a reputation to be soft at that focal length, but I have not experienced that. So because of the sharp pictures the 70-300 takes and the extra 100mm, I have stuck with that lens. Again the 70-200 is an absolutely incredible lens!
|Quoting jetboy23 (Reply 2):|
Wow! That's good to hear someone recommend the non-IS version! Might just go that route.
|Quoting jetboy23 (Reply 7):|
But, how does the 70-200 f/4 USM WITH a 1.4x TC compare to the 300mm f/4 prime?
|Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 8):|
The 1.4x TC will reduce quality a bit, but adds even more to versatility.
|Quoting Rinkopr (Reply 11):|
There are places you can rent high end lenses to try out and compare. I am in the situation you are at the moment trying to decide if I go with the f4L IS or go with the f2.8L non IS.
|Quoting ckw (Reply 10):|
No complaints about any, but the latest 70-200 f4 LIS is as sharp as my L primes
|70-200 f4L IS|