Is there anything better than the 70-200F4L for the same money?

ozyboyross

ozyboyross

Messages
1,081
Name
Ozy
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey everyone,

As above really, ive been wanting this lens for ALONG time, but havent found one at the right price at the right time! well next month is my birthday and I will have the money to purchase the L lens ive lusted over for months!

My question is this, is there anything that rivals or betters the 70-200F4L for the price?

I am looking at a used canon in all honesty, so that will give you a rough idea of my budget!

I dont need 2.8 as i have the canon 70-200F2.8L already, I just find it bulky sometimes! and use it mainly for portrait work indoors!

So is there anything better for the money?

I await your advice!
 
Last edited:
nothing better for a zoom (bar the IS version for IQ) :)
 
Last edited:
in my opinion, if you want a versatile, sharp zoom and the range you need is 70-200 and f4 is ok for you, there is non better. it's a great lens. it's sharp throughout the range and has great colour and contrast.

i guess, the only other thing you could look at for the same sort of cash is a decent prime (which will be sharper), but won't have the flexibility. i certainly wouldn't want to go down the road of the rather naff 90-300 f4-5.6 or anything like that. it will be lighter for sure and cheaper, but it won't be better.

in one sense, it seems rather pointless to already have the 70-200 f2.8 in your camera bag. it's not too much heavier than the f4 version, surely?

speaking personally, if i was you, i'd probably just keep the 70-200 f2.8 and perhaps look at a prime slap bang in the middle of the 70-200 range... just for something a bit different.

but looking at your sig though, you seem to have most of the common focal lengths covered anyway!
 
Having just bought this lens I have to say I don't think there is anything better for the money. Great sharpness through the whole zoom range wide open. Top lens, just wish I could have afforded the IS version.

Steve
 
thanks for the advice guys!! i would love the IS version but its out of my price range by along way lol! i just wondered if there was anything else to consider for the same money!

As for the 70-200 F2.8L it is lovely but it is a big beast, and for a full day at a track etc its a struggle handheld! plus there are times when you just dont want something that valuable with you! (i shoot stock car racing as my mate races) plus my signature as you said does cover nearly everything, its a shared kit bag though, I tend to go halves with my dad for the lens's and then we share them, means we can both have access to alot more!
 
If you use the long end more often, the 200 2.8L prime is a fantastic lens - light, sharp, fast and only slightly more expensive than the 70-200 4.
 
I had considered the 200mm prime grotty, but i think the zoom would suit me better for motorsport, i go to tracks where you can get fairly close to the action, so i think a fixed 200mm would limit me a little bit! plus if i have the zoom then i am able to take it with me for days out to the zoo etc !!

Thanks for the suggestion though, i did seriously consider it! maybe i will add it to my collection in the future!! i do want to get a few primes soon!!
 
I dont think you will do better than the 70-200mm f4, although you might always want to upgrade to the IS version.
 
the IS version is likely to be out of my price range for quite some time! i will have to make do without IS!! I am sersiously thinking of the 2.8 prime now! damn you grotty lol
 
It's funny you're looking at the f/4 version considering you have the f/2.8. I want to go the other way! Is it just the weight?
 
yeah its just the weight, the 2.8 is gorgeous, and i would never sell it! but for a full day with it round your neck and handheld it just gets a bit too much for me, i dont like using tripods/monopods unless i really have to, for a few hours handheld its fine, its just an 8 hour day at a track and it becomes a burden (to me anyway)

it is a fantastic lens though, dont get me wrong!!

I have a 70-300IS currently for those situations where i want to keep the weight down bit i dont really like it very much apart from the size/weight, which is similar to the 70-200F4L
 
Hi Ozy

I am looking at the 70-200 too, instead of the 70-300IS, why don't you like it very much?

I have looked at many of my pics and they rarely go beyond 200mm, I have an old 75-300 but the IQ is pretty grim. I was under the impression the new 70-300IS was pretty good. Obviously there is a significant price difference.

I would be interested to hear your views as a user.

Paul
 
I think the 70-300IS is very good for what it is, and for the money its well worth it, but the 70-200 F4L isnt alot more money, and if you dont need the extra reach between 200-300 then the F4L (from what ive read, and been advised on here) will blow it away for IQ, sharpness, contrast and colour rendition!

The 70-300IS definately has its uses, but the 70-200 F4L will eat it for breakfast!

PS, just to throw another spanner in the works, this will be released for canon mount soon : http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70300_vcusd_a005.asp
 
Yes, had a look at the Tamron link.

Have recently bought a Tamron 17-50, the IQ is staggering (comparable to what I had-Canon 28-135IS)

Sometimes dubious about new on the market kit, prefer to wait a few months to let the furore, and faults, settle.

Looks like a 70-200 will be on my Santa list then.

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