| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/07/2005 05:22:41 PM · #1 |
I have had a 300 D since July 2004. I bought the Sigma 28-200 f4-5.6 and have not been happy with it. It is not sharp and crisp. What are your thoughts on the Canon 70-200 L. It will be used mostly outdoors on wildlife etc.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:29:48 PM · #2 |
I doubt you'll get a bad comment on this lens, sold my 75-300 IS USM to get one, the 100mm loss is more than made up for by the sharpness and f/4 through the zoom. Its reckoned to be about the best bang for the bucks (god I hate that phrase). Even I find it difficult to take a bad shot with it!
One of my first ever shots with it...
This shot was taken under duress, he landed on my head!
Message edited by author 2005-02-07 17:30:43.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:30:13 PM · #3 |
These were taken with the Canon EOS 70-200mm f/4 L. I'm very happy with, and it is my predominant lens. I shoot mostly wildlife, and don't find it cumbersome to carry around.
      |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:30:46 PM · #4 |
| I do not own this lens but have used one. In my experience it is a great people lens and creates shots of rich vibrant color, but is too slow and short if you plan to shoot birds or skittish wildlife. I know people who use the 2.8 with a doubler for that purpose, but if that is the main reason for getting the lens....there are better matches IMHO. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:34:33 PM · #5 |
| I love mine. Nice and lite and very sharp. Great Color too. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:56:02 PM · #6 |
I just bought mine last week. I tried it out at a wedding ceremony this weekend but it was a bit too dark to get a clear image hand-held. Shooting at shutter speeds of 1/60 made for some blurry images (I've got shaky hands like an alcoholic, tho).
Greeeeat lens. I rented one for a concert a while back: nothing but fun! I find it heavy, though..I'm lacking upper body strength however. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 06:17:24 PM · #7 |
i like mine--i use it fairly frequently. here is one shot i took with it:
 |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 06:25:04 PM · #8 |
| I REALLY want to buy the F4 but my gut feeling tells me I should save up for the F2.8. What are your feelings about that? |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 06:36:36 PM · #9 |
I think it's a great lens. I just bought it with a 1.4x teleconvertor. You can see some pictures I took at the zoo yesterday on this thread:
Testing my new 70-200 at the zoo
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 06:37:13 PM · #10 |
In terms of value for your money, the F4L is the best of all L series. If you really need to shot in very low light conditions you´ll have to invest much more on a 2.8, but with f4, high ISO and low money I decided to go with de F4L instead of Sigma 2.8 EX (2.8L was not an option for me $$$), with the saved money i got a 1.4x tc which works very decents with L baby.
Just my 2 cents.... |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 06:50:57 PM · #11 |
| Just remember that for each $500 step in the 70-200 series, you step a litlle further from your tripod. That's what if comes down to. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 07:24:21 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
|
"Wow", whispered thatcloudthere humbly...
Message edited by author 2005-02-07 19:24:39.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2005 07:17:57 AM · #13 |
Thanks to yo all for the comments on this lens. It is the sharpness that I miss. When I got the Rebel, I expected sharpness on par with my film SLR and did not get it with the kit lens or the Sigma. I will post some shots when I receive it. Thanks again for all of your time.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 10/31/2025 01:46:59 AM EDT.
