Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Canon 70-200mm f4L(IS)
I got one of these today as I seem to be powerless over my L addiction. ....a thousand is never enough....Rolleyes

There are 4 flavours of Canon 70-200 Ls: an f2.8, an f4 and a Image Stabilised version of each one in addition to the normal "non-IS" versions.
The non-IS f4 is the cheapest, the f2.8IS the dearest; what makes it interestiing when approaching the issue of which to get, is that the straight f2.8 is roughly around the price of the IS f4.
I had ordered the straight f2.8...but it is very, very heavy for just the extra stop; I also had seen that at f4, they all perform excellently(even though the f4 versions are wide open)
I am delighted to say that I re-ordered the ff4(IS), which in true Canon largesse arrives without the tripod mount of its f2.8 big brothers. Yet at this point, one realises that the Image Stabiliser does actually work, allowing nominally up to 4 stops' worth of "correction".
This means a lot of fun, an ability to get shots more quickly: the "normal rule" for handholding teles is by following the reciprocal of the focal length. That is, at 200mm, you'd need at least 1/200th, more likely 1/320th, to avoid camera shake.
Well, I went out today up the hills: it was very windy and had the tripod in the car as I thought I'd have to use it.

The following shots are hand-held(I'll put another couple of the better ones in the showcase section later):

This the Severn vale, taken from just where the wind hits the escarpment with maximum force. Now, I wanted to ensure a smallish aperture, so would have obviously normally used a tripod, as the required shuttter speed was dead slow.
Here we are at f13, which needed a speed of 1/80th way I'm gonna hold that even on a calm day....switch the IS switch to "on", switch focus limiter switch, get all set up at full stretch of 200mm: a straight conversion with just the merest pp smart sharpen; as ever on these L lenses, I had to dial down the amount of saturation:

[Image: vertviewWEB.jpg]

I have to say that I'd be very pleased with the quality of the image even on a tripod.

Here's a view over Stroud, again at full stretch of 200mm. Handheld again, even though at f11 it would normally be a very steady hand indeed that got away with the required speed of 1/200th sec.

[Image: stroud%20tele.jpg]

Just to prove the point, I've done my "crop at x percent test" so you can get an idea of image quality: remember too that it's a very windy day.
In the original above, see the church in roughly the centre?
OK, now see the 2 clocks on the side of the steeple?
You can just make out the 2 tiny blue-ish circles of the clock....

I rest my case really!

[Image: stroudtele-crop.jpg]
All my stuff is here:
(Just click on the TOP RIGHT buttons to take you to my Image Galleries or Music Rooms!)
My band TRASHVILLE, in which I'm lead guitarist:
Great pictures Zig.
I know this is a beautiful lens. It is a great addition... Wink I also love the IS in mine. It is amazing what you can do with this feature.

Would you show us some examples of bokeh? I'd love to see what comes from your lens... Wink
A work of art which did not begin in emotion is not art.
Paul Cezanne
OK Irma, thank you. As soon as I get one done, I'll post it.
All my stuff is here:
(Just click on the TOP RIGHT buttons to take you to my Image Galleries or Music Rooms!)
My band TRASHVILLE, in which I'm lead guitarist:
I have to say that I used to be puzzled by Canon and its surplus of 70-200 lenses. I never quite understood the need for four of them. Then I got my 35-100f/2 and started to understand the appeal of this range. And then I got my E-510 and started to understand the appeal of IS and the reasons for the additional versions. Finally -- just last week -- I took a 70-200 f/4 (classic) out of its box and marveled at its diminutive size, light weight, and impressive build quality.

I no longer wonder about the cornucopia of workhorse telephotos, but I am thankful that I don't use Canon cameras -- otherwise I'd probably want both the f/4 classic and the f/2.8IS. • @matthewpiers | | @thewsreviews •
Hi Zig.

I have the 2.8 IS and it is my favourite lens. However, as we are going to be going to Europe in July I feel that it will be too heavy. So I traded my back-up 70-200 2.8 non IS for the lens you have just purchased. It is wonderful and so light compared to the bigger brother.

It has beautiful bokeh.

Your first shot is superb by the way.
Canon stuff.
Yes Chris, the 2.8 takes much time if non-IS, which I had in my hands first, as I got a used one...I played off minus one stop against portability and greater versatility and thought f4 really: ideal for your travels mate! Imagine trying to whistle and take candids with the 2.8...?...:/
(Did you manage to get rid of the f1.4 btw?)
All my stuff is here:
(Just click on the TOP RIGHT buttons to take you to my Image Galleries or Music Rooms!)
My band TRASHVILLE, in which I'm lead guitarist:
The 1.4 50 is gone.
Canon stuff.

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Canon sx 50 autofocus RaulAlonso 2 58 Jun 4, 2020, 09:42
Last Post: Jackson Roy
  Which carry bag for Canon 400mm f2.8 Gandalf1953 11 5,127 Sep 8, 2018, 06:11
Last Post: Gleadly
  Canon 60d problem Wilf1954 20 9,213 Jun 25, 2017, 11:07
Last Post: EdMak

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Canon 70-200mm f4L(IS)00