Dfinley
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 7:10 pm

Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Sat Jun 08, 2013 6:41 pm

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
 
User avatar
yerbol
Crew
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:18 am

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Sat Jun 08, 2013 9:32 pm

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
 
Chukcha
Posts: 2019
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 10:57 am

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:53 pm

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.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11755
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:37 pm

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.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
angad84
Posts: 1822
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:15 pm

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

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:01 am

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
 
Dubi
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:39 pm

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Sun Jun 16, 2013 2:41 pm

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]
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2717
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Sun Jun 16, 2013 3:00 pm

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
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11755
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:14 pm

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...
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
JakTrax
Posts: 4635
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Sun Jun 16, 2013 5:56 pm

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
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2717
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:48 pm

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
 
Dubi
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:39 pm

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Wed Jun 19, 2013 7:23 am

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
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2717
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: Canon 70-300mm Is USM Vs Canon 70-200 F4 L

Wed Jun 19, 2013 9:26 am

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests