Canon 70-200 f4

[JAC526]

Hello TPF,

I have a mint condition 70-200 f4. The cosmetic and functional condition of this lens is fantastic. There are no scratches or nicks or dents or fungus on the glass.

Everything is in perfect working order. I have a lens hood that will come with it as well.

I am asking $550.00. Or I'll consider trades for a 100mm f2.

Sorry I do not have a card with my handle on it. If you require I'll upload new pictures.


untitled-8247 by JChick526, on Flickr


untitled-8246 by JChick526, on Flickr

I accept payment through Paypal only.

Thanks for looking,

Joe

 

[Rocketman1978]

I'm looking for a nice zoom lens to replace my Canon EF 75-300 f/4-5.6. I am brand new at this, what can you tell me about the picture quality? Everyone seems to rant and rave about this one: Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: CANON: Electronics , but I don't know if I see myself dropping that kind of money on one lens at this stage. Maybe as I upgrade my rig, develop my skills, etc., but definitely not now. Would your lens be a good in-between?

Please hold this sale until my decision is made, I can do PayPal on Friday or Saturday morning if that is okay with you. Just want to ensure I'm making the right decision here on an upgrade of my 75-300.

 

[JAC526]

I'm looking for a nice zoom lens to replace my Canon EF 75-300 f/4-5.6. I am brand new at this, what can you tell me about the picture quality? Everyone seems to rant and rave about this one: Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: CANON: Electronics , but I don't know if I see myself dropping that kind of money on one lens at this stage. Maybe as I upgrade my rig, develop my skills, etc., but definitely not now. Would your lens be a good in-between?

Please hold this sale until my decision is made, I can do PayPal on Friday or Saturday morning if that is okay with you. Just want to ensure I'm making the right decision here on an upgrade of my 75-300.

Picture quality is excellent. If you would like some examples of shots I've taken let me know. The only differences between the lens you linked and the one I have for sale is mine has a slower max aperture at f4 and does not have IS. If you shoot a lot of low light stuff the 2.8 may be worth it. Otherwise f4 will be enough.

 

[Rocketman1978]

I'm looking for a nice zoom lens to replace my Canon EF 75-300 f/4-5.6. I am brand new at this, what can you tell me about the picture quality? Everyone seems to rant and rave about this one: Amazon.com: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: CANON: Electronics , but I don't know if I see myself dropping that kind of money on one lens at this stage. Maybe as I upgrade my rig, develop my skills, etc., but definitely not now. Would your lens be a good in-between?

Please hold this sale until my decision is made, I can do PayPal on Friday or Saturday morning if that is okay with you. Just want to ensure I'm making the right decision here on an upgrade of my 75-300.

Picture quality is excellent. If you would like some examples of shots I've taken let me know. The only differences between the lens you linked and the one I have for sale is mine has a slower max aperture at f4 and does not have IS. If you shoot a lot of low light stuff the 2.8 may be worth it. Otherwise f4 will be enough.

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now I shoot all kinds of things and would mainly use this lens for scenic or nature shots while on vacation, would this be a good lens for that purpose? I know it would be a significant step up from my 75-300, especially being L-series glass.

If you can post or PM me some sample pictures I would appreciate it! Thanks for offering!

I am going to do some thinking about this over the next few days, if you sell it that's perfectly fine with both you and I, but if you don't I may pick it up from you. I just want to weigh all of my options, being new at this I want to ensure I buy what is right for me.

 

[JAC526]

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now I shoot all kinds of things and would mainly use this lens for scenic or nature shots while on vacation, would this be a good lens for that purpose? I know it would be a significant step up from my 75-300, especially being L-series glass.

If you can post or PM me some sample pictures I would appreciate it! Thanks for offering!

I am going to do some thinking about this over the next few days, if you sell it that's perfectly fine with both you and I, but if you don't I may pick it up from you. I just want to weigh all of my options, being new at this I want to ensure I buy what is right for me.

I completely understand. When I get home I'll upload some sample shots. I think for nature and scenic stuff this lens will be really nice. Also if you travel with it it is much more compact than the f2.8 making it easier to carry and use for long periods of time.

 

[JAC526]

Here are some sample shots:


untitled-8146 by JChick526, on Flickr


untitled-7467 by JChick526, on Flickr


untitled-7469 by JChick526, on Flickr

Sorry they are all of one subject (my wife) but I mainly shoot portraits and I think these are good examples of the image quality of the lens.

Thanks again for your interest.

Joe

 

[Rocketman1978]

Thanks for the quick reply. Right now I shoot all kinds of things and would mainly use this lens for scenic or nature shots while on vacation, would this be a good lens for that purpose? I know it would be a significant step up from my 75-300, especially being L-series glass.

If you can post or PM me some sample pictures I would appreciate it! Thanks for offering!

I am going to do some thinking about this over the next few days, if you sell it that's perfectly fine with both you and I, but if you don't I may pick it up from you. I just want to weigh all of my options, being new at this I want to ensure I buy what is right for me.

I completely understand. When I get home I'll upload some sample shots. I think for nature and scenic stuff this lens will be really nice. Also if you travel with it it is much more compact than the f2.8 making it easier to carry and use for long periods of time.

My only reservation would be situations with dim lighting. I realize it is not an ideal indoor camera due to it being limited to f/4 and I wouldn't use it in that manner, but my worry is cloudy days and its effectiveness. If it performs well on a cloudy day or even the beginning of dusk we may have a deal, otherwise I may just wait quite some time for the f/2.8, if you can post pictures of not only nicely-lit scenarios but more dim scenarios that would be great.

Let me ask you this, again being a noob I don't know, will shooting my 75-300 f/4-5.6 at 75mm and as close to f/4 as I can get be similar to 70 and f/4 with your lens? If so I can take some test shots and see if I can resolve my own 'dim lighting concern'.

 

[JAC526]

Cloudy days will not be an issue.

Your sig shows you have an 18-135 that goes to 5.6 at 135. This lens is one full stop faster than that at all focal lengths.

I don't have available light shots in dim environments b/c I just light it myself with off camera flash at that point.

 

[Rocketman1978]

Cloudy days will not be an issue.

Your sig shows you have an 18-135 that goes to 5.6 at 135. This lens is one full stop faster than that at all focal lengths.

I don't have available light shots in dim environments b/c I just light it myself with off camera flash at that point.

Okay that helps, your first picture that you posted looks slightly dim with a little sun slightly behind you and to your left, that helps! I appreciate your willingness to talk me through this!

Sent you a PM btw.

 

[dbvirago]

Don't want to butt in, (butt I will), I have had the 70-200 f4 non-IS for 5-6 years and it's a great lens - never regretted the purchase. Besides the price difference, it's a lot lighter than the 2.8. Only you can decide if the extra stop and IS is worth $1500+ extra. For myself, when I am in low-light situations, that is typically indoors, so I break out my 17-50 2.8, or for portraits, my 90 2.8.

 

[JAC526]

Don't want to butt in, (butt I will), I have had the 70-200 f4 non-IS for 5-6 years and it's a great lens - never regretted the purchase. Besides the price difference, it's a lot lighter than the 2.8. Only you can decide if the extra stop and IS is worth $1500+ extra. For myself, when I am in low-light situations, that is typically indoors, so I break out my 17-50 2.8, or for portraits, my 90 2.8.

Yeah after shooting with a 2.8 for a whole day I really enjoy how much more compact the 4 is. Like I said above for low light I usually start using off camera flash or switch to a 50mm 1.4.

 

[Corona1]

Pm for you!

 

[JAC526]

Pm for you!

Responded to PM.

 

[JAC526]

Lens has been sold.