Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS

[50mm]

Canon 70-200mm F/4 IS. Anyone have any durability or quality issues with this lens. All the reviews I have seen look good, but I need some user/owner feedback before I buy. Thanks!

 

[o hey tyler]

Canon 70-200mm F/4 IS. Anyone have any durability or quality issues with this lens. All the reviews I have seen look good, but I need some user/owner feedback before I buy. Thanks!

L series lenses are of the highest optical quality as well as build quality. You don't have anything to worry about when buying this lens. It will perform well, and produce very sharp images throughout the focal range.

 

[TwoTwoLeft]

A really good bargain for a L lens is the 70-200 f/4 w/o the IS. It's really sharp and I didn't even miss the IS. You can get one NEW for $700.
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens

If you were going to spend the $$$$ on the 70-200 IS f/4 check this one out.EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens Damn near the same price, but with a constant 2.8. You wont even need the IS.

Honestly, if you were going to spend the money on the 70-200 f/4 IS, I would get the 2.8 instead....

 

[prodigy2k7]

Err don't tell him he doesn't need IS if you don't actually know what he needs.

Both is versions are of newer design, sharper, round Aperture blades, weather sealed etc. the f4 IS is a super sharp lens. I believe one of the sharpest. Excellent lens and I've heard nothing but great things.

I have the 2.8 non is. But I want sharper images wide open and IS. Will get mark 2 eventually.

 

[50mm]

A really good bargain for a L lens is the 70-200 f/4 w/o the IS. It's really sharp and I didn't even miss the IS. You can get one NEW for $700.
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens

If you were going to spend the $$$$ on the 70-200 IS f/4 check this one out.EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens Damn near the same price, but with a constant 2.8. You wont even need the IS.

Honestly, if you were going to spend the money on the 70-200 f/4 IS, I would get the 2.8 instead....

Well, I thought I had this all decided. I had not looked at the 2.8 non IS before now, but I like what I see. It has some very good user reviews on Amazon. Thanks for the good advice!

 

[prodigy2k7]

What is your budget? What do you plan on shooting? Do you need f2.8 or will f/4 be okay? Do you need IS? Do you understand how IS works and the pros cons vs a faster aperture like f/2.8?

 

[50mm]

I know the 4 non IS is not sealed. Is the non 2.8? (I can't find any info on the sealing)

 

[prodigy2k7]

Both non is versions are not sealed. Both is versions are. Mark 2 is if course as well.

 

[50mm]

What is your budget? What do you plan on shooting? Do you need f2.8 or will f/4 be okay? Do you need IS? Do you understand how IS works and the pros cons vs a faster aperture like f/2.8?

$1500 MAX out of pocket. I want a versatile outdoor lens. I have a very good tripod for nature shots, but would like to be able to shoot flying airplanes and birds hand held. I do like the brighter view finder image in the 2.8.
I know just enough to get me in to trouble on any of this photography stuff.

 

[50mm]

Both non is versions are not sealed. Both is versions are. Mark 2 is if course as well.

That seals it for me then. (pun intended) 4 with IS! Dusty Texas gravel roads. I need sealing at that price.

 

[prodigy2k7]

Some L lenses are not sealed. I'm Guessing it's an age thing. All the newer L lenses are sealed. Some of the older L lenses aren't sealed. The non is versions have an older design that don't have sealing that the newer 70-200s have.

 

[Stryker]

Best lens I ever had. You have to take care of the IS though. If you dont need it, turn it off. I replaced mine last January and it cost me more than $200 at a Canon service center here in Manila. Spares for this lens is not readily available and I had to wait for 1 month to arrive from Japan.

I love this lens. Compared with the 70-200 f/2.8 series 1, this is so much better, and a lot cheaper..

 

[TwoTwoLeft]

A really good bargain for a L lens is the 70-200 f/4 w/o the IS. It's really sharp and I didn't even miss the IS. You can get one NEW for $700.
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens

If you were going to spend the $$$$ on the 70-200 IS f/4 check this one out.EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens Damn near the same price, but with a constant 2.8. You wont even need the IS.

Honestly, if you were going to spend the money on the 70-200 f/4 IS, I would get the 2.8 instead....

Well, I thought I had this all decided. I had not looked at the 2.8 non IS before now, but I like what I see. It has some very good user reviews on Amazon. Thanks for the good advice!

Go rent one of each and try them out before you buy.

 

[Dao]

Both non is versions are not sealed. Both is versions are. Mark 2 is if course as well.

That seals it for me then. (pun intended) 4 with IS! Dusty Texas gravel roads. I need sealing at that price.

You may also look for a weather seal camera body otherwise ....

 

[TheBiles]

Don't forget that the f/2.8 versions weigh about twice as much as the f/4 versions. The size is the only downside of the f/2.8.