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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 2, 2005, 8:29 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 8
Default

I'm currently looking to double my rebate on the 20d and get a decent enthusiast zoom lens. Here are the two from Amazon that caught my eye:

This one is


Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...748038-0200159

and

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...748038-0200159



Someone told me that I should be looking at the EF-S lenses that are specifically made for my 20d. However, I called Canon and they said all would be compatible.

I also have been reading up on the lenses and the first seems to be getting good reviews and has IS. The second doesn't have IS, but it is L glass.

Oh, and just a little background... I took some classes in photography as a teenager, but I'm only now getting back to it, now that I have some income.



Thanks for your replies, I know these newbie questions can be irritating. I just don't want to drop $600 and instantly regret it.
Fubar411 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 3, 2005, 1:21 AM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 84
Default

I had to go through the same decision earlier this week with my 20d. I've read (NOTE: no first hard experience yet, it's still in the mail) that the third-generation IS on the 70-300 is great. Some people have reported a little softness or noise at the ends of the zoom lengths, but others report they are fine, so it's probably more of how they are using it.

Many people consider the 70-200 f/4L USM one of the best lenses made in that range, so it's really a tough one.

I personally decided that since I like to be able to hand-hold more often I went with the IS, especially since most of my telephoto shots are during the day outside (nature stuff mostly). Most reviewers seemed to think the optics are pretty decent (although obviously not quite an L series). I'll try to play with it a little bit this weekend if I get a chance, I'll let you know what I think. If you're just a enthusiest and don't plan on doing anything pro, the new 70-300 should be fine (especially at such a nice price compared to the DO), but if you're thinking about going a little more serious and won't use the IS that often I'd probably spring for the 70-200 L instead.
BrianSkibinski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 1:42 AM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

hands down 70-200 f4L its leagues ahead of the 70-300 IS in terms of color and sharpness, not to mention build quality.. and also the front threads of the 70-300 IS rotate during focus, inexcusable in my opinion as it makes circular polarizers worthless..

trust me, i know from exeperience, always buy the best first time around, and you will never be disappointed.. if you stick with this hobby for another even year, you will be returning that 70-300 IS for something better.. whereas the 70-200 f4L is a lens you will keep forever...

---------
dustin

www.hardwickphotos.com
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 7:33 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 8
Default

Thank you very much for the replies. I've been lurking around these forums for awhile (that's why I got the 20d rather than a Rebel...well that and the Rebel felt small in my large hands)

So both lenses work with film and digital, just that you get the artificial zoom. Got it.

Now my last question and I'll stop clogging the board. How much difference in zoom is there between 200 and 300? I like shooting outdoors and possibly indoor events, so maybe I wouldn't miss the difference?

Thanks again.
Fubar411 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 8:39 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Hards80 wrote:
Quote:
.. whereas the 70-200 f4L is a lens you will keep forever...
I tend to agree with Hards80; However, ever wonder why there's so many 70-200 f/4L on Ebay if it's a keeper? :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 9:25 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 175
Default

In my case, and for many others, the only reason to sell the 70-200 was to finally upgrade to the 2.8/IS version.


Chris M
www.imagineimagery.com


NHL wrote:
Quote:
Hards80 wrote:
Quote:
.. whereas the 70-200 f4L is a lens you will keep forever...
I tend to agree with Hards80; However, ever wonder why there's so many 70-200 f/4L on Ebay if it's a keeper? :idea:
ChrisDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 3:10 PM   #7
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Hards80 wrote:
Quote:
.. whereas the 70-200 f4L is a lens you will keep forever...
I tend to agree with Hards80; However, ever wonder why there's so many 70-200 f/4L on Ebay if it's a keeper? :idea:
my guess is for the same reason Chris traded his in... wanted a faster 2.8.. which is the downfall of the f4L, but image quality wise i have not seen or heard much bad about it..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 3:39 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Exactly... :idea:

So why not get the 2.8 in the 1st place (IS on non)! :-) :lol: :G
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 6:02 PM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Fubar411 wrote:
Quote:
Now my last question and I'll stop clogging the board. How much difference in zoom is there between 200 and 300? I like shooting outdoors and possibly indoor events, so maybe I wouldn't miss the difference?

Thanks again.
It can be quite a bit of difference. BUT, you can use a 1.4x TC on the 200mm and get 280mm with a max aperture of 5.6.

When you get right to the bottom of it, NHL is 100% correct - sooner or later people want faster glass - which means buy the 2.8 from the start. If you plan on using the lens for sports or wildlife - BUY 2.8!!!! - otherwise even though the 70-200 f4 is a great lens you'll find eventually it's either too short or too slow

So, my recommendation - buy the 70-200 2.8. If not that, then buy the 70-200 f4 and add a TC in the future to get more range.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 6:13 PM   #10
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

well yea!! given the choice get the 2.8!!

just didnt know that was an option here :blah:
Hards80 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 6:45 PM.