Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:36 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

Canon 70-200mm F4 (non is) vs the 70-300mm f4-5.6 (Non L)
Canon 70-200mm F4 (non IS) 20%  20%  [ 1 ]
Canon 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS 20%  20%  [ 1 ]
Canon 70-200mm F4 IS 40%  40%  [ 2 ]
None of the Above!! 20%  20%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 5
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 9:49 am
Posts: 56
Location: Portsmouth
Ok it has been about 8 months since I brought my Canon 60D and 17-85mm lens. I have finally got round to the point where I am nearly ready to buy a new lens, I have been in Scotland for the last few weeks taking landscape shots, these can be seen on my flickr if anyone is interested www.flickr.com/gareththomasjones . My big decision is that I dont want to spend a huge amount of money on a Lens that im not going to use all the time, for example a 10-22 wouldn't really be what I want because I think that that would be too wide and then I wouldnt use that enough.

My real decision is between the Canon 70-200mm F4 (non is) and the Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 (non L) Now my big question is do I need image stabilisation for out door photos of seals or deer? And would you say the difference between 200-300mm is worth it.

I can probably get the 70-200mm for about £40 more than the 70-300mm which is neither here nor there. I was thinking the Non IS rather than the IS version because I could then maybe afford another lens, the 28mm 1.8 or the 50mm 1.4? Or a speed light If I wanted to use the 70-200mm in doors, this would also be able to be used with my 17-85mm lens.

Also I assume the 70-200mm can be used with the 1.4 converter and still have AF.

Bit of a long post but Hey!!!

_________________
Cameras: Canon Ixus 100is. 60D 17-85mm
Computer: 2008 Apple Macbook Aluminum (dreaming of a new retina macbook pro!!)
Phones: iPhone 1g And HTC Wildfire Apple iPad 3 wifi
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gareththomasjones/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 8:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:19 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Maribor, Slovenia
I've used the 70-200 f4 non IS with a 7D and it's a stellar lens. Just wow. Mechanically and optically.

I think the centre point of the 60D should be sensitive down to 5.6, so the f4 lens with a 1.4TC should still be able to autofocus.

With the money you save buying the non IS, you could also get a tripod :) I'm no expert on canon primes, don't know anything about the 28mm 1.8, but I've heard that the canon 50mm 1.4 is not the best and that the sigma is a better alternative. The Canon 50mm 1.8 (plastic fantastic) is a very good lens optically if you can live with the worst autofocus, it hunts and misses all the time, it's really frustrating.

Good luck making your decision :D there is never a right answer, unless you are a millionaire and just buy everything :D

_________________
Nikon D7000; Nikkor 35mm 1.8 DX, Nikkor 50mm 1.4 G, Nikkor 70-300mm VR, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 (non VC)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
The old 70-300 isn't particularly great, and if you were to look for that range zoom the latest Tamron equivalent is supposed to be a good one.

Question then is, what do you think you'll use the lens for? If you think you'll regularly need 300mm, get a 300mm zoom. Yes, the 200mm can take a 1.4x to give up to 280mm f/5.6 with AF, but the extender is extra cost and it never is fun adding and removing it if you need to shift ranges in a hurry.

For animals, it does depend a lot on how close you can get to them. IS is a nice to have but not essential.

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 9:49 am
Posts: 56
Location: Portsmouth
I was in scotland last week and took this https://www.dropbox.com/s/fuuywgklssguimt/IMG_1058.jpg with my canon 17-85mm lens at 85mm. So I was pretty close I would say, I have tried cropping but I loose quality obviously. The outlines on the photo in theory represent the different focal lengths assuming my calculations were correct. Now, will the extra sharpness of the 70-200mm be enough to crop in that little bit to the canon 70-300mm?

I am also quite keen for everything to be Canon brand, partly because im a bit of a brand nut, partly because I feel that they will be better quality but mainly because other brands zoom rings turn the other way and that annoyed me on my old film cameras!!

_________________
Cameras: Canon Ixus 100is. 60D 17-85mm
Computer: 2008 Apple Macbook Aluminum (dreaming of a new retina macbook pro!!)
Phones: iPhone 1g And HTC Wildfire Apple iPad 3 wifi
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gareththomasjones/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:19 pm
Posts: 67
Location: Maribor, Slovenia
If you want to shoot wildlife the canon 100-400mm L 4.5-5.6 IS US is also worth taking a look at. It's about 1400€ new but I've seen them used as low as 900€, which is what the 70-200 f4 IS would cost new.

_________________
Nikon D7000; Nikkor 35mm 1.8 DX, Nikkor 50mm 1.4 G, Nikkor 70-300mm VR, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 (non VC)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
The backwards zoom is annoying for me too!

On the cropped 70-200 vs 70-300 it is hard to say. The latter is not bad but not great either, whereas the 70-200 is supposed to be quite good all round.

One other option to consider springs to mind: the EF-S 55-250! Cheap but has a reputation for a decent image quality even if the build is nothing to write home about.

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 5:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Kanduhar, Afghanistan
2 things, First look at the Tamron 70-300 over Canon's non -L 70-300. It has a few advantages over Canon's most important to me is a non-rotating front element that makes it much easier working with polarizers. Second, if animals are a big thing you shoot, I will tell you that you will want the longer focal lengths more often than not. Lastly (oops that's 3 things), all though I haven't yet had the opportunity to come and visit my homeland of Scotland (and I do plan on it) I understand the weather can be very yucky which means a lack of light so the IS will come in handy if you need to stretch your shutter speed a bit for lack of light. My 3-cents :)

Quote:
One other option to consider springs to mind: the EF-S 55-250! Cheap but has a reputation for a decent image quality even if the build is nothing to write home about.

I've been using the 55-250 exclusively for the past 4 months and will be locked into it for another 5, it's all I have here in Afghanistan. Surprisingly it is a good lens. I've gotten some super sharp images at 55 to 100, I will say though at 250 it is soft.

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 6:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 9:49 am
Posts: 56
Location: Portsmouth
I think your over estimating how dark it is up there!! I was able to get 320ths of a second up there at iso 100 nearly every day, so i assume that that speed would be enough to avoid camera shake at 200mm?
As I have said before I am a bit of a brand freak! Canon and Apple all the way! I also want an L lens so I think I have decided to go with the 70-200mm non IS, (unless someone offers me a really good argument against it! or I win the lottery within the next year!!)

Thanks Guys!

_________________
Cameras: Canon Ixus 100is. 60D 17-85mm
Computer: 2008 Apple Macbook Aluminum (dreaming of a new retina macbook pro!!)
Phones: iPhone 1g And HTC Wildfire Apple iPad 3 wifi
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gareththomasjones/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group