Random request... 70-200 f/4 and 70-300 IS

Amp34

Amp34

Messages
2,859
Edit My Images
Yes
Could anyone that has both lenses (possible!:lol:) post a photo of the mside by side?

I'm trying to decide which one to go for and one of the important factors is the size of them, unfortunately my local camera store has neither and dimensions written down only go so far....

:)
 
I suddenly remembered they had a comparison photo after I posted this! :lol:

However if someone does have both I would appreciate a couple of comparison shots not directly head on. :)

Having said that having a play with the lens comparison page the IQ and sharpness of the 70-300 is a lot worse than I was thinking whereas the 70-200 with 1.4xTC is very similar in sharpness to the 300 f/4... Dammit! More money and bigger, but do I go for it... :(
 
And here's one I did earlier :D



Be aware that the dimensions quoted in the digital picture article for length are mount face to the front of the un capped lens, so the size "in your bag" with caps on will be larger.

I measured the 70-200 at 193mm and the 70-300 at 163mm with caps.

70-200 hood is 100mm in diameter the 70-300 hood is 96mm in diameter.

If you are thinking about the 1.4 extender that is 28mm between the mount faces.

Oh and in my opinion go for the 70-200L. Having used both I can see why people like the 70-300 but it's not in the same league as the 70-200L. The non IS version has to be a bargain in comparison. The IS version less so but I would not buy a tele lens without IS having used these two for a while.

HTH

David
 
Thanks dude. :thumbs:

Hmmmmmmmmmmm....! Still can't make the full decision... I'm planning on selling the 75-300 IS and the 300 f/4 to get a single smaller lens and some money for my trip and the 70-300 fits all the bills (price, size, inconspicuousness) except one of the big ones... IQ... However the 70-300 IS will be around £330 whereas the 70-200 f/4 and 1.4tc will be around £550.....
 
Mmm that's a hard choice. All I can say is that I stopped using my 70-300 above 200mm because I was so unhappy with the IQ.

The other thing to remember is that on a crop body 200*1.4*1.6 for the crop is over 400mm in 35mm terms and requires a good deal of skill to get sharp images.

The 70-200 is mercyless at showing up poor technique.

PM Kerso on here for high street beating prices :D

HTH

David
 
Well I just put my 300 f/4 up for sale :( so I'll need to make a decision quickly. I did really miss the IS on the 300 after using the 75-300 IS and that was something that is a positive for the 70-300 IS...

Again.. Dammit! :p
 
I have the IS version of the 70-200 L and the 70-300 IS

Have a look at my Flickr and compare the 2 bushy park sets.

The first set (2009) was taken on a crappy grey morning with the 70-300
The second set (2010) was taken on a lovely sunny morning with the 70-200

Both are good lenses , but the L has the better IQ
 
Well I ended up trading my 300 f/3 for a 70-200 last night... Just waiting for it to arrive! :D

It's only a tiny bit bigger tbh and I guess I can get some neoprene covers for it... :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top