Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 27, 2010, 8:15 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default CANON 70-200mm L f/4 (non IS) Vs 70-300mm IS

hello
any thoughts on which is the better all round performer
both canon the 70-300mm is is the original version without DO
i have a flash for indoors
the reviews rave about the L lens
both very similarly priced @ just under $700 before tax
thought i would ask here as many of you probably use these on a regular basis
or should i save more and buy the F/4 IS version or the F/2.8 non IS version.......must confess i have a huge fan of IS...both my lenses have it..
the F/2.8 is way outta my budget at close to 2 grand or more
the f/4 is version and f/2.8 non is are also outta my budget but i can save some more and look for a deal somewhere ($1500)
right now i have the 28-135 and the 18-55.....i am also selling off my other gear to help my budget along.......

thanks in advance
cheers
pete
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 27, 2010, 8:22 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

They are both very good lenses, but they're for different purposes. What do you want to shoot?
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 2010, 8:28 PM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Yeah they're priced the same for a reason:
70-300 has more reach, image stabilization and is lighter
70-200 f4 is sharper, faster to focus, better built
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2010, 8:37 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

hi TCAV
mostly shooting reg stuff, maybe some sports, but i will be near the sideline,
some flowers close up
the horse races , not too far away, about10-20 ft from finish line
scenery, buildings, portraits of kids, family, friends
hey what do you think of the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 priced same as the canon f/4
thanks your comments
enjoy summer

Last edited by deterpawson; Jul 28, 2010 at 8:59 PM.
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2010, 8:50 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

For outdoor action, 200mm is not really long enough for most things. I used to use a lens like that for photographing Dressage, and equestrian sport, but it takes place in a relatively small area. For most other things, you'd probably benefit more from the 70-300's longer reach and stabilization, than the 70-200's slightly larger maximum aperture and slightly better optics and build quality.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2010, 9:15 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

sorry i meant the sigma 70-200 f/2.8...is that a good lens
i laready have the sigma 70-300m f4-5.6 lens........it does some ok macro......not very fast autofocus.......also not sharp 200-300mm......but very reasonably priced........im looking for a good quality lens
right now i have
kit 18-55
canon 28-135 is
sigma 70-300 apo
will sell my sigma to finance next lens
thanks tcav
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2010, 7:00 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Yes, the Sigma 70-200/2.8 is a good lens, but it still only goes out to 200mm, which is the real limitation for what you want to do. The Canon 70-300 IS USM will run rings around your Sigma 70-300 APO.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2010, 7:25 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

If you need a brighter lens then the Sigma is good value for money, the Canon 70-200mm f4 is sharper and will actually take a 1.4x teleconverter better than the Sigma will as the Sigma gets a bit soft at 200mm.

Unless shooting sports under lights then the Canon options are the best to choose between.
__________________
[SIZE=1][SIZE=2]Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2010, 9:13 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

tcav.....i wouldnt mind sacrificing 300 for 200 it the lens quality is far superior, as i have the rebel xsi which has 1.6x factor, i only got the 20-300apo sigma coz that what i could afford at the time......

mark.......when i do sports its usually still light and then later floodlights.....i dont do a lot of sports......i like shooting the races........im not too far away....so far im still within reach with my 28-135.......
would i be safe to say that the canon 70-200 f4 L lens is better glass/image quality/sharper than the sigma or even the 70-300canon IS
yes i do plan to get a 1.4 or 2x convertor when $$ permits
thanks for your input i am truly appreciative
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2010, 10:09 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Any of the lenses you've mentiond will outperform your Sigma 70-300 APO.

Where their ranges overlap, there isn't much difference between the Canon 70-200/4, the Canon 70-300 IS USM, and the Sigma 70-200/2.8. The difference is the extra range of the 70-300, and the maximum aperture of the others.

If you don't shoot sports at night very often, the maximum aperture won't help as much as the extra range.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:11 AM.