is 70-200 F4 L lens worth getting?

[20Babies]

$ vs sharpness......the BIG Question...
Or is there a better 3rd lens like Tamron or Sigma with the same or better quality, and value for $?

 

[wdEvA]

to me, it's worth every cent.
Canon really excels in their telephoto lens =)

 

[deepashes]

70-200 f4 IS from what i heard has the best quality of all canon 70-200..

As for worth is or not also depends on your usage.

Sports might need the f2.8.But unless you dont need high shutter speed den f4 is more worth is lor.

IS for handheld day shots when u dont wan to set up tripod every time you want to zoom to e long end.

Otherwise, if you use tripod all the time, then you dont need IS..

So really depends on your needs.

 

[raptor84]

Its more than worht it if you shoot alot of outdoor action or even portraits. Can even be a good zoo lens

 

[Standard]

very sharp lens.. worth every cent u spent

 

[RyanG]

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

It's the sharpest among the four variant of 70-200mm.

 

[cqprime]

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

It's the sharpest among the four variant of 70-200mm.

which model?

 

[RyanG]

which model?

70-200mm f/4 IS USM

 

[halcy0n]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=103&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Not sure if this link will paste correctly but http://www.the-digital-picture.com has a useful comparison function. it seems at the same focal length and f4, the 70-200 f4 is still sharper than the 2.8.

 

[Reportage]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=103&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Not sure if this link will paste correctly but http://www.the-digital-picture.com has a useful comparison function. it seems at the same focal length and f4, the 70-200 f4 is still sharper than the 2.8.

not really a sharpness issue, example is if shooting a basketball game...which would be easier to get the most useable(less blur?) pictures?

 

[hkdigit]

If you can afford the $ and weight, 2.8L IS is a better choice.

 

[charlesleong]

not really a sharpness issue, example is if shooting a basketball game...which would be easier to get the most useable(less blur?) pictures?

sports in general you want a large aperture lens to freeze motion.

200f2 or equivalent fast lenses.... f4 generally you'd need to bump ISO or shoot only well-lit spoting events.

 

[jvanhatten]

$ vs sharpness......the BIG Question...
Or is there a better 3rd lens like Tamron or Sigma with the same or better quality, and value for $?

This lens is definitely worth getting, but there is a bigger question here. What do you plan to use it for?

If you plan to use it for portraits, then I would recommend the 70-200mm f/2.8.

 

[Goldenstars08]

70-200 F/4L (non IS) is value for money lens. Very good for out door shot. Recommend that...

 

[Snoweagle]

Used to own the non-IS version and is tack sharp! Kinda missed it, might even consider buying it back.

 

[pplneedthelord]

sorry to OT a little:

lets say if i were to get a 70-200 f/4L non-IS.. would it work well if i shoot indoors with my 430EXII(direct flash)?

 

[raptor84]

Well it would work depending on the distance you are at but you would get pretty harsh and flat lighting. Also if you are talking aobut some sports, flash photography is not allowed

 

[pplneedthelord]

Well it would work depending on the distance you are at but you would get pretty harsh and flat lighting. Also if you are talking aobut some sports, flash photography is not allowed

hmm if i were to shoot direct flash at 200mm on my 430EXII, what would the possible result be? i'm guessing it'll look bad?

 

[Snoweagle]

sorry to OT a little:

lets say if i were to get a 70-200 f/4L non-IS.. would it work well if i shoot indoors with my 430EXII(direct flash)?

I've used it under extreme low lighting (like disco) with flash of cos and results are still very gd.

 

[shahrulesa]

I think if you just dial in some conpenssation should be ok since the FOV will be quite narrow (and hopefully can get even lighting). Maybe just -ev a bit.