Canon 70-200 f/4

Messages
1,391
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
Just received a substantive promotion at work (even at my advanced years) so I fancy a treat (!). I currently have a 300d with a 50mm f/1.8 and a recently acquired 17-40L. A pal advised me that the 70-200 would "complete" the outfit. It's a great lens but I wonder if the money wouldn't be best suited towards a 20d - just wondered what you guys/gals think. Ideally I'd like both (!) but as always there're other commitments.

I'm orf to Switzerland in mid-July too - ideal for the 17-40 but I thought a zoom might come in handy. The last few times I was there I had no interest in photography but now I can imagine all sorts of scenarios.

Cheers me dears :)
 

IanC_UK

TPer Emeritus
Messages
14,116
Name
Ian Cook
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
To be honest, i would say get the 70-200, then if you can afford to upgrade later you just need the 20D body and all of your lenses will still fit ! If you go to Switzerland with a 20D and your current lenses, you will still feel short a lens without the bigger zoom !

My 2p worth anyway ! :)
 

CT

TPer Emeritus
Messages
28,411
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
Buy the lens! The 300D is still a great camera capable of delivering superb results, and the ability to swop lenses is one of the main reasons we buy an SLR - or should be. Without the lenses we're severely restricted in what we can do. You'll probably get the 20D at some stage anyway. :wink:
 

dod

Droopy
Staff member
Messages
26,112
Name
Ebenezer McScrooge III
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
The 70-200 F4 is great, BUT, think carefully about what you want it for. I bought it and thought it would be enough. Unfortunately I find myself regularly needing just that tiny bit more and so, I'm ordering a teleconvertor. A better, albeit more expensive option in my case would have been the 100-400 or a third party alternative. Unfortunately I can't justify forking out another grand just now.

I'm not trying to damp things but just trying to make sure you get the right thing, good glass is expensive :)
 

IanC_UK

TPer Emeritus
Messages
14,116
Name
Ian Cook
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
dod said:
The 70-200 F4 is great, BUT, think carefully about what you want it for. I bought it and thought it would be enough. Unfortunately I find myself regularly needing just that tiny bit more and so, I'm ordering a teleconvertor. A better, albeit more expensive option in my case would have been the 100-400 or a third party alternative. Unfortunately I can't justify forking out another grand just now.

I'm not trying to damp things but just trying to make sure you get the right thing, good glass is expensive :)
I know what you are saying mate !

Only argument i can have with that, is !!! i think when i get my 100-400 next week, i will probably still find myself just a little short on magnification sometimes ! ;) so then a converter, and then maybe a 600 or a 1200 (although £60000 for that may be a little excessive) etc etc ! ;) lol
 
Messages
38
Edit My Images
No
#10
I have one, and I can't fault it. It's light, sharp and great value for an "L" lens. :D
 
Top