Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

canon 70-200 f2.8 non is or 70-200 f4 is?????


ireid7 e2
8 11 Scotland
16 Jun 2010 1:51AM
i am thinking about investing in a new telephoto lens for wildlife,action ...ect.
would like but cant afford the canon 70-200 f2.8 is roughly 1550
so its either the 70-200 f2.8 non is or the 70-200 f4 is boath roughly 900.
any advice bearing in mind most of my photos are taken hand held or at sea on a boat. any advice welcome

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

arhb e2
7 2.5k 68 United Kingdom
16 Jun 2010 9:08AM
If you're sure that a 70-200zoom range will be sufficient for what you want, then I would vouch for the F4 IS version - superb lens and a very versatile bit of kit.
That said, you mention wildlife/action etc, and I wonder whether you might need a 300mm or even 400mm?
Have you considered tis range?
ireid7 e2
8 11 Scotland
16 Jun 2010 10:59AM
i curently have a canon 70-300 is usm f4-5.6 witch is a good lens, but i would realy like to upgrade to a "L" lens
for image and build quality,still thinking about the 100-400 is f4-5.6 (which one of my friends has) but not shure about push pull zoom. any thoughts on that?
i think a probably would miss the extra zoom range but there is always the x1.4 & x2 extenders.
thanks for replying
ian....
User_Removed 7 2.2k 3 United Kingdom
16 Jun 2010 11:09AM
I had the 70-300 and it just wasn't quite long enough for what I wanted. It was good up to 200 but fell away quickly after that. I used the 100-400 and was impressed. Much better than the 70-300 and I found the push/pull zoom very natural. I'd still always favour a long prime over a long zoom for sharpness but it's still an excellent bit of kit.
arhb e2
7 2.5k 68 United Kingdom
16 Jun 2010 11:18AM
The 300mm F4L IS would be an option, and retains IS with a 1.4tc connected.
I have the 400mm F5.6L which is a great lens, but loses AF with a tc attached, unless you use the 1D body.
I *think* both of these are cheaper than the 70-200F2.8L IS, and well worth considering.
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
16 Jun 2010 11:20AM
I have a 1 year old Canon 300mm F4 IS, which I might sell, if you are interested....Smile
ireid7 e2
8 11 Scotland
16 Jun 2010 7:41PM
coleslaw, i've been looking trough your photos taken with your 300mm f4 is, very impresive! how would you rate the AF system for tracking fast moveing objects comeing towards you? (birds,dogs,.....ect)
keep up the good work!
cheers ian.....
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
16 Jun 2010 7:46PM
It isn't bad, though I haven't used it much.
I am using a 5D2, which really isn't ideal for tracking fast moving objects.
And I need something a bit longer.
74640348 4 1 Angola
5 Jul 2010 11:03PM
I recommend you to get 70-200 f4 L IS because of the following reasons;

1. Light weight
2. Better sharpness
3. IS is working excellent.

Only drawback is F4 so sometimes you need to boot ISO to get required shutter speed. Read more review from http://ezinearticles.com/?Canon-EF-70-200-F4-L-IS-Lens-Review&id=4562533
Overread 6 3.9k 18 England
5 Jul 2010 11:25PM
Honestly I would take Coleslaw up on his offer - the 300mm f4 plus a 1.4TC will give you the quality and the range that you need for wildlife. A 70-200mm lens does have a place within nature photography certainly, but its not an ideal wildlife lens I've found.

I worked with the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L (the original) and even with a 1.4TC it was just too short a lot of the time, even though it still held high quality (and was a great setup for zoos and similar places). A 2*teleconverter could be used, but the quality was lost. I've now shifted up to the new version of this lens (another 300odd on top of the price you found for the f2.8 and that is grey import through Kerso/Ian Kerr) and the 2*TC is performing far better!

However as you rightly note its a very expensive move and if range is what you need rather than the 70-200mm zoom versatility then the 300mm f4 is a far cheaper (and I would expect better as its a prime) option for you to go for!
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
6 Jul 2010 8:38AM

Quote:Honestly I would take Coleslaw up on his offer

He was going to buy it from me, Alex. But I saw it cheaper somewhere else, so I directed him to buy there. (yeap, I know, stupid me, shooting myself on the foot).
Overread 6 3.9k 18 England
6 Jul 2010 9:24AM
Well at least you can keep your puffin lens this way Grin
8 Jul 2010 7:46AM

Quote:Coleslaw, i've been looking trough your photos taken with your 300mm f4 is, very impresive! how would you rate the AF system for tracking fast moveing objects comeing towards you? (birds,dogs,.....ect)
keep up the good work!
cheers ian.....



I can vouch for the AF on the 300mm f4. I have used this lens for a few years now and I think it is great. This sequence was shot last uear with one on my 40D and one of them actually won a competition for sharpness, subjest etc!! Most of the other pictures on my website were also taken with this combination.

http://applewood.sc11.co.uk/main.php?g2_itemId=403

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.