Canon 70-200mm f.4 L lens

iNick · Aug 7, 2011

I sold my T1i with kit and a few other odds and ends i didn't use, and bought a 40D body( making $184 profit :thumbup

anyway, i only have a 50 1.8 right now and I'm planning on what lens to add to it. Im thinking of picking up a 70-200mm f.4L zoom. My reservations are lack of IS, and only going to f.4. I don't generally bring a tripod or monopod with me when i shoot so I'm afraid unless i shoot in bright daylight I'm gonna have trouble getting crisp shots. I would enjoy the reach of 200mm because I'm limited with only the 50mm right now. My birthday is coming up in october so ill be able to afford the lens (since it's only $675 new $600 used) and i would have it in time for the United States Disc Gold Championship that is played in my neck of the woods which i love going to (also in october). Is this lens $400 better than the Sigma 70-300mm DG APO lens? if i pick one of those up i can put more money towards the 17-40L or the 24-105L... I'm so torn! haha. At the end of the day, my biggest concern is a good image > versatile lens selection. Any words of wisdom is appreciated.

Thanks,
Nick

vtf · Aug 7, 2011

I just bought the 70x200 f4, as I type it's on it's way to me. I am so excited because it's a highly regarded lens. It's lighter than the 2.8 and IS versions so from what I've heard can be shot at a lower speed. Counting the days. :thumbup:
PS: on ebay I've seen used go for $450 to $550.

iNick · Aug 7, 2011

vtf said:
I just bought the 70x200 f4, as I type it's on it's way to me. I am so excited because it's a highly regarded lens. It's lighter than the 2.8 and IS versions so from what I've heard can be shot at a lower speed. Counting the days. :thumbup:
PS: on ebay I've seen used go for $450 to $550.

Excellent! Please let me know how you like it, I'm eager to hear a first hand experience with it.

Dao · Aug 7, 2011

I bought mine used a year ago locally for $450.
It is quite a sharp lens (even at f/4) from center to corner with my cropped 40D body.

iNick · Aug 7, 2011

Wow Dao that's beautiful. Do you find it to be a good walk around lens?

Dao · Aug 7, 2011

That's not my walk around lens. I usually carry the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 with one prime. However, if Iplan to take some photos that need a longer focal length, I may take that with me. In general, I usually carry 2 lenses and one body.

Like the House Sparrow in the photo above, I packed my camera bag with 1 camera with the Tamron mounted on it, one EF 70-200mm f/4L and one flash because I planned to go take some bird photo during lunch break on that day.

iNick · Aug 8, 2011

My concern is the only lenses ill have will be the 50 1.8 and the 70-200L, so my shortest focal length will be 50mm obviously. I'm a little concerned that 50mm will be my shortest focal length. It'll be a while before i can afford the 35mmL that i really want.

GooniesNeverSayDie11 · Aug 8, 2011

Personally, I would go for a 17-50 f/2.8 because its a better walk around lens ( or a 17-40 f/4L or 16-35 f/2.8L if you want better glass ). The 70-200 is a great lens, no arguments there, but in my opinion ( and this is without knowing exactly what you like to shoot ) its going to limit you without having the wide focal lengths covered. Also, I always see the 70-200 f/ Non-IS going for around $500 on craigslist. I would be patient.

iNick · Aug 8, 2011

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:
Personally, I would go for a 17-50 f/2.8 because its a better walk around lens ( or a 17-40 f/4L or 16-35 f/2.8L if you want better glass ). The 70-200 is a great lens, no arguments there, but in my opinion ( and this is without knowing exactly what you like to shoot ) its going to limit you without having the wide focal lengths covered. Also, I always see the 70-200 f/ Non-IS going for around $500 on craigslist. I would be patient.

I don't really think i would get much use out of the 17-40 or 16-35, i don't do landscape at all and i i think the widest ill personally need is 35mm, that would be my next planned purchase, the 35mmL. Ill be using the 70-200 for photojournalism type street stuff and candid street shots. Ill also be using it for sports as often as i can. I figure if i had the reach i would set my tripod up and get some bird shots (there are a ton flying around my back yard, its a small enough yard where 200mm will be plenty, and the sharpness of the L glass will make for a nice crop to get in tight on the birds.

GooniesNeverSayDie11 · Aug 8, 2011

17-40 and wide angles in general aren't just for landscape, especially when placed on a cropped sensor camera, but if you feel you will use a longer lens over the short one, who am I to argue.I will add though, that for street shooting and photojournalism, you are still going to be better served with a 17-40 ( or comparible focal length ) lens, unless you require some sort of stealthy approach, but even then, a 70-200 really isn't THAT long. You are still going to be quite obvious, even more so with a big bright white lens barrel.

vtf · Aug 8, 2011

I am considering the 15-85 lens as my walk around after the 70x200, it's downfall is it's an EF-S lens. It has very good reviews, better than some Ls. I do have the 18-55 kit currently for a walk around now and 50 1.8 so I'm not in a hurry. Good Luck.

Destin · Aug 8, 2011

iNick said:
My concern is the only lenses ill have will be the 50 1.8 and the 70-200L, so my shortest focal length will be 50mm obviously. I'm a little concerned that 50mm will be my shortest focal length. It'll be a while before i can afford the 35mmL that i really want.

I currently have this issue. The only 2 lenses I have for my Nikon D80 are a sigma 70-200 2.8 (you might consider looking at that too, since it goes to 2.8 for the same price as the Canon f4) and a 50 1.8. I get my OK with those 2 lenses because I mostly shoot sports, concerts, and portraits. But there have been a few occasions where I've missed having a wider lens. My next lens will be a tamrom 17-50 2.8 (or nikon 17-55).

If you do alot of group shots, or indoor work, then you'll want something wider before the 70-200

iNick · Aug 8, 2011

My issue isn't that i don't feel the need for a wider lens, its just that i want the 35mmL over most of the wide angle lenses. I haven't taken the 50mm off my camera since i got it a few months ago and have had very little problems with it not being wide enough. If i had the money i would pick up the 35mmL now and a zoom down the road, but the zoom fits in my budget for now. I don't make money or plan to make money for a while, so it's hard for me to justify spending a lot of money that i don't necessarily have. I feel that eventually when i have a 35mmL 50 1.8 and the 70-200mmL i'll have a pretty good span of focal lengths covered.

DiskoJoe · Aug 8, 2011

The 70-200 f4 is a good way to go. Of course sigma makes a nice 70-200 f2.8 for around the same price if you needs the extra two fstops. still no IS but more aperture never hurts. But that depends on what you want to do with whether you really need it or not. The 17-40 is a nice lens too. I have a few friends that own that one. They all swear by it but they do use it for landscape photos on full frame cameras too. so...................................