Canon 70-200 F4 & 1.4TC or 200mm 2.8

Bluesmachine

Bluesmachine

Messages
666
Name
Niall
Edit My Images
Yes
Strange question I realise, but as I'm about to buy one of the two, I was curious which to get.

Canon 200mm 2.8 L USM MKII is highly rated, as you'd expect.

Canon 70-200 4L is also highly rated but I've read it's a touch soft as you reach 200mm.


Now, the ranges I have covered are:

12-24 (nice quality Sigma)
50mm (still waiting for Sigma 50mm1.4 14 days after order...sent a nasty email to them today. Gits.)
70-300 (suckiest Sigma thing that ever sucked)
105mm (pin sharp Sigma macro)

My only concern is not money, as this is a gift for me for Christmas (yay!), and ideally I want to place the order tonight so I get it by the weekend, but the actual quality throughout. As I can't stretch to the IS version of the F4, it's either the non IS one, or just sticking with the 200mm which admittedly limits me, but if it's better quality I'll just stick with that.

My brain is telling me to get the 200mm but as I rarely see the 200mm mentioned, I was wondering if my thought process is flawed here before chucking money away.

Can anyone share thoughts on this please?

A thought has occurred to me that I could get a 1.4 extender too, which would cover the whole 70-300 range (well, to 280) if I got the 70-200. Would this be worth doing? I suppose it has the added bonus of an extender for all my lenses.


I should mention that what I take photos of varies a lot, and I'm basically improving my lenses before upgrading to a full frame camera, or if funds don't allow, up from my 30D to 60D or 70D when that's out, next year(?). I have over the years been avoiding the 70-300 as I really hate the lens, which as a result has made me appreciate the 50mm & 12-24 a lot more, hence my Sigma 50mm order 2 weeks ago. I'm learning as I get a lens basically :)

All input on this subject will be gratefully accepted and appreciated :) Oh, I put TC instead of extender in the thread title, because I'm all sorts of special :D
 
The Canon extenders will only work with L lenses of 135L and above and the zooms up from 70-200L although the will also work with TSE lenses too.

With your current lens range I would say go for the 70-200L f4 as the versatility would probably suit you more.
 
Hi, Well I am not an expert infact I just purchased the 70-200L none IS, it arrived today but not had a chance to try it out but found these photos from others http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_70200_4u
I did ask about the IS version but as my main interest is landscape and I always use a tripod I was advised not to worry to much about IS, seems Ok if you are hand held or in darker lighting situations.
Sure there is someone here who can guide you better than me also for me there was the cost differance.
 
I'm starting to over think things now. I can think of a reason to own both, but if I'm honest I think I'd appreciate the 70-200 more to slot in. At least if I find that this gives me more creative freedom for areas previously unexplored, I can always sell it on for a reasonable price towards the 2.8 at some point.

I think my mind is almost made up. Unless someone else comes along with a reason not to get it :D
 
The 70-200 F4 IS is a fantastic lens... certainly not soft at 200 in my experience....
 
Get the 70-200 you'll not reget it. If I had mine to hand you could have tried it. This was taken with a 70-200 f4 and a 1.4 converter at full zoom (280mm)

ER5D2027.jpg
 
That's a very nice shot :)

It seems that stock is low on this lens. Amazon have them in stock, and are pretty much the only reliable stockist I can find. WHE have it on back order. I'd like to have the lens by the weekend, so I'll 'risk' Amazon. Can't be any worse than the shoddy digitalcamerashop who charge you before sending the lens, then conveniently have no stock :(
 
Canon 70-200 purchased. I've decided to try the cheapo Kenko extender after reading some favourable reviews of it. Still the same price as ordering the 200mm alone would have been, so no loss if it's not as sharp as I can return it :D

Thanks for the replies :)
 
Sorry to hijack, im upgrading my full system (sony crop A450) to a 5D Mk II in april, already pegged the 24-70 2.8 L but i was going to get the 70-200 2.8 L as well, is it worth the extra cash over the f4? Just asking as the concensus in here seems to be the f4 rocks? Apologies to the OP again :) If it helps the f4 can be had for £862 and the 2.8 for anywhere between £949 and £1800 if online prices are to be believed.

Si
 
Last edited:
If your going to work in low light get the f2.8. I want the 70-200 f2.8 mk2 due to the image quality. The only other reason for the f2.8 very is speed of focus. someone will be along to correct me thoue
 
Cool thanks fella, im hoping to be using it in low light (inside the church at weddings) so i guess the 2.8 is going to be better. But ive still got to find out if my togging dream will come to light (scuse the pun lol ;) )
 
Can I ask why not the 70 - 200 F2.8 lens???
 
The 2.8 is a fantastic lens, but it is heavy - I had both but sold the 2.8 as I found it (the f4 version)way easier to live with. Speed of focus is something to give serious thought to, but do remember the weight factor..
 
Last edited:
Crud, thanks for that. Guess id better go for the f4 then, weight is a big factor but so is price, the 2.8 IS USM II isnt available for less than £1500 but the f4 IS can be had for £900 ish. Better value i think.

Cheers

Si
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top