Canon 70-200 L f4

glastogibbo

glastogibbo

Messages
461
Name
Dale
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm possibly looking at buying one of these lenses and was wondering
whether they vary much in sharpness, as the 100-400 seems to.

Any one any views on this?
 
The 70-200 f4L seems to be well accepted as a very sharp zoom.. There's the old f4L, the f4L is and the f2.8(?) not looked much into the 2.8 due to the xtra price and weight
 
glastogibbo said:
I'm possibly looking at buying one of these lenses and was wondering
whether they vary much in sharpness, as the 100-400 seems to.

Any one any views on this?
Click to expand...

The copy I had was certainly sharp as have been others that I've tried, I think it's quite a safe lens. Personally I think the soft copy thing is a bit of a myth, I've owned a couple of 100-400s and used a few others and all have been excellent. I think many 'soft copies' are down to pilot error, some seem to think that yo can shot at 400mm and not worry about the shutter speed as they assume the IS can work miracles.
 
I pretty much agree with this. The f4.0 70-200mm series have an excellent reputation, and mine is very sharp.

A lot of the 100 - 400mm issues are probably due to pilot error, but some people think there was a batch that had problems a few years ago. I don't know if that's true, but it sounds plausible enough. The complaints seem to have eased off now. Have a look here, if you're interested http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=19&sort=7&cat=27&page=1.
 
J.D. said:
70-200 f/4 is a sharp lens, dont think theres much variation between copies.
Click to expand...

Have to agree, these things are dam sharp, I have one and what a difference from the standard Canon lenses
 
Photogo! said:
The 70-200 f4L seems to be well accepted as a very sharp zoom.. There's the old f4L, the f4L is and the f2.8(?) not looked much into the 2.8 due to the xtra price and weight
Click to expand...

Many thanks for replys, the old f4? are there any physical differences to the newer one, or have you got to age from the lens code?
 
I think he means the non IS f4, it's an older design than the IS but still made and available new...
 
Just to add - I've had the f/4, the f2.8 IS and the f/4 IS versions of this lens. I've settled on the f/4 IS version which is brilliant, and portable enough that I take it with me. I didn't like the f/2.8 IS version (Mk1) as it was a little soft wide-open, sharpening up nicely at f/4, whereas my f/4 IS is sharp wide open, and a lot more portable. F/2.8 was also very visible in public and I like to be a bit more discreet. Not sure why Canon's stuff is quite so large as it is...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top