Thinking about the 70-200 F4 L (on a 300D)

M

Mikharper

Messages
216
Edit My Images
Yes
So I've had the 300D for a few years now, and pretty much since day 1 I have had:

Kit lens,
Sigma AF 70-300/4-5.6 APO
50mm 1.8

I've really enjoyed photography over the years, never felt held back my the 300D until recently, more so the lens/light!

So my question is, with the current cashback and christmas looming, do you think the 70-200F4L is worth (350-70-90ish(for sigma zoom)) £180ish? I know its a great lens, and putting money into glass is better than new cameras, but I cant help feeling I'll enjoy my new lens, but still wish I had a bigger buffer on the 300D (one of my main gripes, 4 Raw in a short time is too slow :() or proper AI Servo/Quicker focus, and so on and so forth, hopefully you can gather what I mean.

I toyed with selling both kit and sigma and putting it towards a Sigma, 18-200 OS, then quickly relised I love the benefits of SLR too much to go back to a 1 lens system.

Also, I have been offered (kindly) a good price for a battery grip for my 300D which if I do go for the 70-200F4L I think I will definatly go for.
 
Thats the exact price and upgrade path I've just chosen, and for the money, its a no brainer :)
 
70-200 every time. I've got the F2.8 version but miss the F4, it really is a lovely lens.
 
BTW, 350-70-90 ain't 180 :)
 
One of my first digital cameras was a 300D It's still a good camera .The 70-200 f4 is a great lens and have taken some great shots with it on the 300D. It's light , easy to hold and sharp. Now that the IS version is available the price has also dropped a bit making it good value.

Nice thing is if you ever upgrade you 300 the lens will stand you in good stead even with a full frame body
 
It depends on what you shoot. I had exactly that combination of 300D and 70-200 F4 for sunday football and had exactly the same frustrations as you - small buffer.

I've upgraded to the 40D to get around this. The other thing I've noticed is that the 300D shutter doesn't fire when you pust the button - ther's a slight delay so I was automatically anticipating - which I don't have to do with the 40D.

However, the 70-200 F4 L is a great lens for the money. Pin sharp, light at only 0.7kg, it's my most used lens. Buy it and you won't be disappointed
 
Exactly Byker, I've noticed the not dead on shutter too, but I guess for now I'll go with the lens, and learn to live with the 300D's frustrations.

70-200mm is pretty much what I always use on my Sigma, because of its soft 300mm and f6.3 I tend to not go that far.

Going from 300D+ 70-200, to 40D, what where the major differences?

Thanks for the replies, just waiting on Ian (kerso) to be back from vacation to go from there.
 
For the price it is a stunning bit of glass. Almost certainly the best bit of glass out there for the range.

If you can afford it get the IS version. It'll increase the hit rate of sharp shots.

If you've got DEEP pockets (mine got sewn up just after buying this) then get the f2.8 IS version.
 
Sadly, the F4L is at the top top of my budget at the moment, even with selling the Sigma/Casback and so on. I tried the f2.8 IS out for shiggles and I don't think id feel comfortable holding it all day, being 5'5 n all :D but I can definatly see the advantage with IS, just not able to stretch to it just yet.
 
The weight of the straight F4 is why I bought it. It's a very comfortable lens for sport use, especially when running up and down football sidelines. It's also got the advantage of not changing length when it zooms so you don't get a weight transfer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top