1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Canon 70-200 f4 L or 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

Discussion in 'Photography Forums' started by mxseduti, May 16, 2005.

  1. mxseduti

    mxseduti
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Messages:
    12
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    Not sure which to go for???? At the moment im leaning towards the 70-200 f4 L

    Will be shooting mainly motorsport.
    Any help or experience with either of these lenses would be much appreciated.
     
  2. RobertP

    RobertP
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    522
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Woodford Essex
    Ratings:
    +0
    I have the 70-200 F4 L . Can't say i use it that much. Its the sort of thing you take with you when you think you may need it. A bit big and a bit conspicuous for general use. That said it does take some pretty good pictures :)

    I can't advise you on the motorsport but I would have thought 200mm might not be enough. It can be used with a 1.4x converter - something I am considering. As you get longer so IS gets more important - which it does not have.

    I looked at piles of reviews for the DO IS lens and still wonder if it might have been a better choice. The conclusion I came to from all I read was that it had inferior performance in the image it produced (though not that bad) but was better in that it was not big and not white - meaning it was more likely you would take it with you and use it. It is not compatable with any extender so you cannot make it longer. It is also of course more money.

    I got my F4 from 7dayshop for £399. I bought it with the idea that if I change my mind I can ebay it and not lose too much money on it. Not changed my mind yet but if a trip to the states happens late this year who knows what I might come back with :rolleyes: .

    Someone will be along shortly to tell you to get a 100-400L :D
     
  3. condyk

    condyk
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    399
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham
    Ratings:
    +7
    :rotfl: :rotfl: I wonder how common this is. Certainly reflects my experience!

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/224656

    Relevant discussion thread ...
     
  4. RobertP

    RobertP
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    522
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Woodford Essex
    Ratings:
    +0
    Had a quick glance at your link - one comment said impressive results in good light (or words to that effect) . I took the 70-200 with me on a day out for a pub lunch and riverside walk a couple of weeks ago. The sun was out (and too many people!) and the shots I got made me think WOW! Before that I thought the pictures were good - but not that special. It does need good light to be at its best.
    Once you get that glimpse of whats possible it makes you want more.
     
  5. Johndm

    Johndm
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,813
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Bedford UK
    Ratings:
    +56
    The man is getting 'L' fever, a common problem when you have seen the results from the white beasties... :D

    Oh, and Buy a 100-400L......... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

    The 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM seems to be lesser quality pictures, but much more convenient to carry around.

    Having said that, my 100-400L is now packed into my hand luggage for my impending departure to west coast USA........ :smashin:
     
  6. c75mitch

    c75mitch
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2002
    Messages:
    38
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Hemel Hempstead
    Ratings:
    +0
    I definatly go for the 70-200.

    I have used a friends 70-300 but there is not much comparison.

    Here are a few sample pics from my 70-200 on my 350d.

    All pics are 100% crops, no other alterations other than resized to post.

    The 1st 3 are on my 70-200

    the 4th is on my 100-400 (you want one of these) :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page

Loading...