Owners of Canon 70- 200mm f/4 post pics please :D

[Brown.]

Can you guys post some decent shots with this lens...cheers

 

[Rich]

Not get many shots from mine without a 1.4 extender on, first two would have but not sure on the last.

 

[Rich]

Just the 70-200

Just found these the first ever shots I took with mine.

http://www.richtreen.co.uk/images/70_200_test/

 

[Brown.]

whats it like with the 1.4x??

 

[Rich]

Fine, I can not tell what shots it is used on unless I look at the EXIF data.

 

[Brown.]

sweet

 

[Track'd]

You can't go wrong with this lens, never really heard anything bad about it. I managed to buy mine 5 years ago from 7dayshop.com when they sold lenses, a lot cheaper than they are to buy now too. I have the 1.4ex too, works well with it! BUY IT

 

[Brown.]

Was gonna go for the is but i would probs just end up turning it off :S

 

[f0xy]

I origninally got mine for £300 delivered from ebay, in mint condition. Had it 6 months then sold it just last week for £360 on ebay.

Im on the lookout for another L series lens, with a bit more reach this time...The 70-200 was a good lens though, loved using it.

 

[Schweppy]

I love it. I'm still getting used to it and the following pics are pre-editing, straight off my 400D.

 

[andywright182]

i want one of these now

 

[18tooo]

mmmm.... think one of the 70-200 F4s may well be my next lens purchase, waiting to see if canon have their cashbacks on lenses this year or not and then of course the other question.....to IS or not to IS??

 

[f0xy]

i had non IS....didnt feel the need for it, might have made the shots better but i dont know

 

[Rich]

I only really use my for motorsport and it is so light no real need for IS.

 

[unofficialPete]

Do like mine when I'm using it, works well with a 1.4TC, use a Kenko Pro with mine.

I think I'd use it more if I had the IS version to be honest, does me well when I need it though. Focus, colours, contrast etc are great..

 

[JamieITR]

Had mine a few months now and only used it for motorsport, i've found it to be a really good lense.

 

[dk]

these were all with the 70-200
http://www.flickr.com/photos/david_knight/sets/72157608487142202/

taken loads of motorsport ones too but its a great lens for most things, also, portraits, gives great DOF

 

[Andy.]

You have probably been already but there is a thread full of samples on POTN.

 

[Brown.]

Got a 70-200 this morning with a 1.4x bit dissapointed with the 1.4x compatability as non of me efs lens fit but over all!

 

[Jungle_Jim]

im looking to possibly getting one of these, or the canon 70-300 USM IS (quite like the fact this has IS and a special panning IS mode too) not sure which to go for, has anyone used both lenses so can compare them
cheers
James

 

[JamieITR]

im looking to possibly getting one of these, or the canon 70-300 USM IS (quite like the fact this has IS and a special panning IS mode too) not sure which to go for, has anyone used both lenses so can compare them
cheers
James

This chap has tested just about all the canon lenses and done comparisons:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I've personally only used the non IS 70-300 in addition to my 70-200 and so can't really compare, however as already said i think the 70-200 F4 is a fantastic lense for the money.

 

[Brown.]

Were talking 70-200 L...... 70-300 is not L glass and i think is f/5.6?

 

[dk]

Were talking 70-200 L...... 70-300 is not L glass and i think is f/5.6?

indeed, massive difference between these two lenses, the L lens isn't even glass its that good!

 

[Jungle_Jim]

Were talking 70-200 L...... 70-300 is not L glass and i think is f/5.6?

yeah i know mate, was just in a bit of a dilema about which one to get, i was trying to see if by the time you had paid extra for a 1.4x teleconvertor (which then makes it F5.6 aswell) to get it too near 300mm whether the quality was noticably different that it was worth paying the extra money over the 70-300 IS USM.


basically at the momemt i have a tamron 70-300mm lens, which for still subjects the image quality is pretty good. recently i have been going to more motorsport events and found that it suffered a little in this environment, the focusing was a little slow and the images especially at 300mm appear a little soft. i want to upgrade to something which will produce sharper, crisper images.

 

[dk]

i take a lot of motorsport photos with the 200 and have no 1.4x, never been a major problem without it, thought about getting it but not had a major need to.

I would be much happier using the converter on the 200 than going for the 300, totally different glass of product, the 200 is sharp as anything from 70 right through to 200, no degradation.

 

[Brown.]

yeah i know mate, was just in a bit of a dilema about which one to get, i was trying to see if by the time you had paid extra for a 1.4x teleconvertor (which then makes it F5.6 aswell) to get it too near 300mm whether the quality was noticably different that it was worth paying the extra money over the 70-300 IS USM.


basically at the momemt i have a tamron 70-300mm lens, which for still subjects the image quality is pretty good. recently i have been going to more motorsport events and found that it suffered a little in this environment, the focusing was a little slow and the images especially at 300mm appear a little soft. i want to upgrade to something which will produce sharper, crisper images.

the 300's top end will be no were as good as the 200 non is's top end then cropped in photoshop.....i have a sigma 70- 300 apo dg and the 200 with the 1.4x is noticably better..... images seen cleaner, more intense

 

[Jungle_Jim]

Well guys i am now a member of the 70-200mm f4 club, picked on up today off ebay for £325 in as new condition with a lens hood, and most importantly a 12 month warrenty.

 

[McBunny]

isnt standard l warranty 7 years for the uk ?

what date code is it ?

 

[Jungle_Jim]

erm not sure mate as i only won the item about an hour ago, i have been looking on ebay for a while and they seem to go for around £350-£370 often without a lens hood and sometimes with stupid postage. i think it was a fair price and if it has extra years of canon warrenty left as well then that is a bonus

 

[Clart]

L version going cheap here - he'll take £300

http://www.avforums.com/forums/digi...ssifieds/858711-sale-canon-70-200mm-f-4l.html

 

[Jungle_Jim]

L version going cheap here - he'll take £300

http://www.avforums.com/forums/digi...ssifieds/858711-sale-canon-70-200mm-f-4l.html

already got one now mate , its a good price but im not bothered about paying the £25 more for one as new condition with a lens hood and from a shop with a warrenty, its worth it just for the peace of mind

 

[f0xy]

i originally got mine from ebay for £302 delivered many months ago.....and sold it a few weeks back for £370.......looks like you got a good price

 

[Brown.]

i got mine for 300 too.....think tahst the going for em now