Canon 70-200 F4L

Hi Guys, Anyone have this Lens thinking of getting one would you class it as a walk about lens?

Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM is a very sharp lens and is available new for under £500 now I think. The focal length certainly is handy as a general walkabout lens but being f4 it's not the fastest however if you're steady handed / use a tripod / don't want very fast auto focus for fast moving subjects then it's a great lens.

There's four canon 70-200mm models:

Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM (as above)

Canon EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM which is still f4 but has image stabilisation so will improve hand held shots or allow you to get similar results in lower light. Might be £900 though.

Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM which being f2.8 benefits from faster auto focus but also allows you to put a 1.4 teleconverter or even a 2X telvonverter (retaining AF) giving you a 400mm f.5.6 lens combination which then gives you a lens for wildlife / birding. Similar £900 or so.

Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM obviously gives you the best of both worlds being f2.8 and has IS but goes with saying comes at a fair old price. £1800 or so.

If I was looking for a 70-200 and was hell bent on one of the canon models I would try and go for the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L USM. Just that extra stop for af speed and being able to use a teleconverter to get 400mm f5.6 makes it so much more versatile.

Budget is obviously an important factor but there's no shortage of used examples of these lenses available so you might get a tidy used f2.8 for the price of an f4

Phil has covered this lens very well, the only two things I would add are the f2.8 versions is quite a bit heavier, but gives a lovely shallow depth of field.

I have the f2.8 IS version and love it and although I have used it as a walk about lens, I find the 24 - 105L is the best walk about lens.

Whatever you go for, good luck, look forward to the shots being posted here!

xx

The F2.8 IS is a heavy lens, Like Ken i occasionally use it as a walkabout lens but prefer my 100-400 as its considerably lighter. The F4 version is supposed to be lighter, a case for a visit to your local photography store to have a hold and see what you think.

An alternative 70-200 if you wanted f2.8 is this one - best price retailer from camera pricebuster

Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 II EX DG MACRO HSM

http://www.carmarthencameras.co.uk/p...iiexdgmacrohsm

I use both the f2.8 and the f4. The f2.8 is too heavy for use as a walkabout general purpose lens,

What body are you using. If it is a cropped sensor then I would consider the 70mm - 200mm as too long and would opt for a far shorter focal length. I find the the 24-105mm even a bit long on a cropped sensor and would opt for the 17-40mm which I use a lot on my full sensor and cropped sensor bodies.

I to have the Sigma 70-200mm lens and yes it is very heavy but being an f2.8 lens its brilliant for capturing birds in flight. Those birds in the raptor link were taken with it.

http://www.yophotographer.com/page.php?t=17067


Bazza

The Sigma's tripod collar look as though it can be removed without dismounting the lens which quite handy, I wish Canon would adopt this type of collar.

I agree about the 24-105 but the suitability of the 70-200 focal length (even with a crop) is really down to to what sort of thing the OP tends to shoot when walking about. It would certainly be my ideal focal length if I could only take one lens out for a wander.

As for weight - again that's a personal thing - the non IS version of the 2.8 is heavier than the f4 but it's no back breaker.

You have both Steve but if the OP can only choose one it's a case of deciding whether the lightness of walking around with an f4 outweighs having an f2.8 lens that can also double as a wildlife lens with the addition of a teleconverter.