A&P canon 70-200L. f2.8 vs f4.

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by raptor_talon, Jan 23, 2005.

  1. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.
    what am i going to be missing with the f4?
     
  2. Tikigod

    Tikigod New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 stop and the possibilty of not being able to use the f/4 indoors
     
  3. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.
    I can live with that. f4 it is. :bigthumb:
     
  4. vizual

    vizual → 190½ ЯBI ←

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    13,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gouge Eye, Ca
    no kidding, at half the price too
     
  5. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    the filter size of the F/4 is non standard, though possibly cheeper than the F/2.8. The 2.8 is heavier and more expensive, but if you ever do indoor shots or low light shots, you'll really miss the 2.8 or 2.8 IS.
     
  6. Twisted

    Twisted Beauty in motion.....

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2001
    Messages:
    2,370
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Great Northwest
    If you don't absolutly need to shoot indoor low light, get the f4. Its half the money and a great lense.
     
  7. MelloBoy

    MelloBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    hello,
    just got out of the newbie cue :p

    i use the 70-200 f/4L and have used the 70-200 f/2.8L and f/2.8L IS versions in the past. the IS is nice, but not entirely necessary. imho, the 2.8 by itself doesn't really act as a good indoors camera...if you want something low light, you should really go with the f/2.8L IS as it'll allow you to decrease shutter speed by 2 stops or so.

    this is debatable, but some people have said that the f/4 has sharper images, and i tend to agree with that. the only bane is that, some of the f/4s have back-focus issues and some people have bought and returned 2 or 3 lenses to get one that doesn't have that problem. i hear more about it with the EOS-300D/10D more so than the EOS-1D or their full frame dSLRs...i can't say for certain about the 20D.

    if you had a choice between the f/2.8 non-IS, and the f/4.0, i would jump on the 4.0. cheaper by about 50% and lighter. the f/4.0 doesn't, i believe, have the weather sealing that the other L lenses do so you should make certain that's something you could live without. i also use the f/4.0 as my walkaround lens. yes, it's a bit large, but it's nothing most people wouldn't be able to get away with after maybe a day or 2 getting used to it. great for composite/panoramic shots, and what not. personally i think it's a VERY versatile lens and has great sharpness.

    here are some samples of the f/4 in action as well as one 1.4mb composite shot that you can look at if you wish :)

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    big one: http://www.garagespirits.com/images/yosemite/halfdome_pano_small.jpg

    hope this helps in your decision :p
     
  8. vizual

    vizual → 190½ ЯBI ←

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    13,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gouge Eye, Ca
    good info and nice shots MelloBoy. I really like that dog picture :bigok:
     
  9. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.
    thanks for the samples. You've helped me make up my mind. I'm going to be making the purchase in 1-2 weeks.

    thanks. :bigthumb:
     
  10. ElDude

    ElDude Hiya!

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    North Wales
    Haha mini lion :big grin: :big grin: :big grin:
     
  11. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.

    I just bought the F/4 last night and now I'm broke (but that's another story)

    Preliminary shooting (at the store - so I could test the lens I was buying) showed no back focus issues on my 20D.

    First thoughts:
    Autofocus tended to hunt in low light - but that was expected.
    sharp, sharp, sharp
    bokeh is quite nice
    heavy on the 20D (although I have a vertical grip w/ 2 batteries on the camera as well)

    thus far recommended :bigthumb:

    now for something to replace the 18-55 kit lens. Maybe a the sigma 24-70 f/2.8 EX or Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XR DI
     
  12. Milin

    Milin It's Terminal.

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2001
    Messages:
    5,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bay Area CA

    sigma 18-50 f2.8 :hs: ? I have yet to see any samples from it taken by an amateur and I want to see some!
     
  13. MelloBoy

    MelloBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    indoor or outdoor?
    if it's outdoor and for moderate light, canon ef 17-40mm f/4L would be one i'd look at. for lower light conditions...then well...can't help cause i don't do low light :)

    canon 50mm f/1.8 prime maybe? lol...your feet can act as the zoom

    congrats on your buy!
    as a future purchase, look into the tripod mount ring for the lens. at its current point, i want to say that the mount is on its limit as to what it can hold w/o breaking on a tripod. the lens mount will help take the stress off the mount. also, the black tripod ring is less expensive than the white one :)

    melloboy
     
  14. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.
    I already have 50mm f/1.8 prime. :bigthumb:

    I should have bought the tripod mount ring last night - i wouldn't dare mount this thing on a tripod using the camera/grip mount. Way too front heavy for that I think.

    Thanks for the suggestion on the black version - are they of similar build quality?
     
  15. MelloBoy

    MelloBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    they're identical....just different part numbers and color. cannon's just trying to make money off L lens owners wanting matching tripod mounts LOL.
     
  16. hash browns

    hash browns lolcathlon champion OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    95,391
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    f/2.8 is great .

    :dunno:
     
  17. raptor_talon

    raptor_talon Who is the master? Sho'nuff!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    5,809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    T.O.
    :mamoru: you want me to be your guinea pig.

    Let me do some research first. I already know the Sigma 24-70 and Tamron 28-75 get glowing reviews though.
     
  18. Milin

    Milin It's Terminal.

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2001
    Messages:
    5,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bay Area CA
    i have a 28-300.

    28 isn't wide enough for some inside shots. Youre going to want at least the 24 to get some good shots indoors.
     
  19. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0

    Which 28-300? While I know the Canon is better than any of the others, that big of a zoom entales some probalems. Its such a nice idea to be able to only carry one lens at times though. But for $2k for the Canon, it would have to see a lot of use cmpared to some primes or other L zooms
     

Share This Page