Camera Labs

So far I'm very happy with this L Lens. After getting very frustrated with trying to convert RAW images to JPG images. I finally got it. The images come out very clear. Here are some from today.



Later everyone.

_________________
Allan Love Jr

nicely done!

Love the crispness in the detail!

_________________

Canon XSi/450D | BG-E5 Battery Grip | Canon EF 17-40 f/4L | Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS | Manfrotto 055XPROB | Manfrotto 488RC2

Flickr <--Comments/Favorites welcomed

Here she is on the XSi body.

Perfect balance, solid build, and amazing optics!

This is one superior piece of glass!

_________________

Canon XSi/450D | BG-E5 Battery Grip | Canon EF 17-40 f/4L | Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS | Manfrotto 055XPROB | Manfrotto 488RC2

Flickr <--Comments/Favorites welcomed

I'm in a similar pickle as jimmy_racoon was - well almost. I'm on the lookout for a good zoom to carry with me to India this summer and I'm considering either the 70-300mm IS USM (not the DO version) or the 70-200mm f/4 L USM (not IS version). The reason I'm not considering the DO version of the first lens and the IS version of the second lens is down to capital. I can't afford expensive lenses as I'm spending my savings on the India trip. I like to take pictures of almost everything and whichever of the two lenses I choose, it'll be used mostly for hand held shooting of details and things in the distance. This will require fast shutter speeds or image stabilization (at least in my world) and I'm a bit uncertain if the f/4 of the L lens will be sufficient in overcast weather (it will be monsoon season when I travel to India) to prevent shaky pictures at longest focal lengths. On the other hand it will complement my 17-85mm very well as they can share the same filters and it comes with a lens hood, which the 70-300mm lens doesn't. If I am to get a lens hood for the 70-300mm AND new filters (which I quite probably would) the price difference between the two lenses would become almost insignificant. On top of that, the L lens' end doesn't rotate when focusing like the end segment of the 70-300mm does which will be frustrating when using circular polarizing (which I like to do). The only thing speaking for this lens is it's image stabilization.

So it all comes down to this:

How well does the 70-200mm f/4 L USM without IS perform in dim light conditions such as heavy overcast weather? Will it require image stabilization to get crisp photos? I would really like to own the L lens but if it's not going to perform spectacularly well under the circumstances stated above, I will have to go with the 70-300mm with IS.

Any help about the performance is very appreciated.

Many thanks in advance.

_________________
Esben - used to be a wide angle photographer but then I took a Fuji X100 in the knee
My deviantART

Welcome esbenlp!

Tough position to be in! You are about $500 away from having it all.

That said, maybe BNSFrailfan can speak to the low light, non-IS, performance of the f/4 L.

I see a lot of his train work is in good sunlight, but he might be willing to post some cloudy day shots to give you a sample.
(Send him a message if he doesn't happen to see this post)

The 70-300 IS is a pretty good lens and might do well for what you want.

However, the f/4 non-IS 70-200 are getting easier to find at a good price.
The L quality will blow away the 70-300 and you'll have all the advantages of filters and hood as you've mentioned.

If you search for pictures with the 70-300 and can live with the level of sharpness, you'd be safe and within budget with that choice.

Best of luck with your decision, the CameraLabs forums will support you either way!

_________________

Canon XSi/450D | BG-E5 Battery Grip | Canon EF 17-40 f/4L | Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS | Manfrotto 055XPROB | Manfrotto 488RC2

Flickr <--Comments/Favorites welcomed

Here you go, shot with the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM on a very overcast day middle of February 2008

_________________
Roy
EOS 350D, 40D + BG-E2N, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 430 EX Speedlite




My Fotopic

thanks, Defiance

In your opinion, would you have gotten as good a shot with IS turned off?

esbenlp is trying to determine if the non-IS f/4 will be fast enough in low light.

I guess I could try a few shots with the IS turned off!

_________________

Canon XSi/450D | BG-E5 Battery Grip | Canon EF 17-40 f/4L | Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS | Manfrotto 055XPROB | Manfrotto 488RC2

Flickr <--Comments/Favorites welcomed

Thank you for the welcome, jimmy_racoon!

Some pictures without the IS turned on would be greatly appreciated but you don't have to stress yourself as I'm not going to buy it until May, where the financial part will fall into place.

Thank you for sharing the photo Defiance but as jimmy_racoon said, I'm looking for dim light performance without the IS turned on. How do you think the lens would have performed without the IS turned on? Would it have been difficult to take the shot?

I'm going to PM BNSFrailfan and ask for some sample pictures if he overlooks these posts.

The 70-300mm lens would probably get the job done, but I would just hate to pay the same amount for a non L lens, as for an L lens, to get the same accessories (lens hood and filters). I hate to make do with less than optimal and in this case the 70-300mm lens is the lesser of the two in my eyes.

Thanks for the help so far.

_________________
Esben - used to be a wide angle photographer but then I took a Fuji X100 in the knee
My deviantART

esbenlp:

We had a 40 degree, overcast day today to test lens performance on the 70-200mm f/4 L IS to see how she does in low light.

(For both shots, I used Program Mode at 165mm with no post-processing.)

This is the first shot with IS turned on, 1/400, f/6.3, ISO 200:




Now the same shot seconds earlier with IS turned off, 1/400, f/5.6, ISO 200



Here is a cropped shot with IS off:




Here is the same level of crop with IS activated:



Hope this is helpful to you or other potential 70-200 f/4 L owners.

Feel free to visit my Flickr link below and examine the photos in their original sizes for a better appreciation of the difference that IS makes.

_________________

Canon XSi/450D | BG-E5 Battery Grip | Canon EF 17-40 f/4L | Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS | Manfrotto 055XPROB | Manfrotto 488RC2

Flickr <--Comments/Favorites welcomed

I have now decided, to go for a 70-200 f/4 IS instead of a 70-200 f/2.8, even though i am really into portraits! The f4 version is just much lighter, cheaper, and has IS, which is a life saver in low light, far better than f/2.8! Although after my 70-200 f/4 i am going to buy a 100mm f/2.8 macro, which will double up for macro and a great length for portraits!

_________________
Ed


Canon 40D + Grip | Sigma 10-20 EX | 17-85 | Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX II | 50 F/1.8 | 430 EX II + Other Stuff
Flickr
Portfolio - Not recently updated!
Saving for: -

Good call Ed. I’m sure you’ll be pleased with it.

I went to buy a 70-200 f2.8 IS. a few weeks ago and, despite ‘knowing’ all the specifications, I walked away from it - I just couldn’t believe the weight of the damn thing.

Cutting a long story short, I decided to 'think it over' before going back to the shop; a day or two later I stumbled across a bargain elsewhere and I bought the f4 IS version.

The 70-200 f4 IS is every bit as good as everyone says it is, fast AF, solid build and absolutely tack sharp. It's light by comparison and relatively easy to carry around.

As to esbenelp’s dilemma, I wouldn’t like to depend on the 70-200 f4 without the IS, especially at longer focal lengths. jimmy_racoon’s crops, mirror my own limited experiences with this lens.

Looking up the weights, the 70-200 f/2.8 versions are about the same as the 100-400L which I've used for a while now. When I first got it, it did seem heavy, but I got used to it rapidly. I hardly feel it now, but I wonder if my left arm now has more muscle than my right :p

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

I'm Totally Agreed with you Ed Right now I'm also looking for 70 200 f/4L IS USM Previously I was preferred to have the f/2.8 IS version but the Problem is not only the price but talking about the dimension is way to BIG & HEAVY to carry Around! I'd been tried my friend's 70 200 f/2.8 IS version The AF Speed was so FAST & Produces nice image quality BUT it was So Damn Heavy!!! >.<! So I decided to scale down to the f/4 IS version which is lighter & less pricy than the f/2.8 version & I was surprised that at Photozone Lens Review said that f/4 version has better Optical quality than the f/2.8 version

Review for the 70 200 f/4L IS USM &
Review for the 70 200 f/2.8L IS USM

_________________
Soon.....

I'm Imagine those 'Lovely' Lens on my 450D & Thanks for the picture of Rebel XSI attach with 70 200 f/4L IS USM Jimmy!

_________________
Soon.....

glad to share the combination, Adi!

this is one fantastic lens and may go down as one of the best of all times.

I read every review I could find...several times...but this one sold me:

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/196-c ... ew?start=2

_________________

Canon XSi/450D | BG-E5 Battery Grip | Canon EF 17-40 f/4L | Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS | Manfrotto 055XPROB | Manfrotto 488RC2

Flickr <--Comments/Favorites welcomed