DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Which "L" to buy?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 20 of 20, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/13/2004 08:30:14 AM · #1
Does anyone have experience with both the 70-200mm f4L AND the 200mm 2.8L? These two lenses are close in price, but something tells me there's no noticeable difference in quality (just speed). If this is true, I'll most likely get the zoom - but I don't mind using primes (I have the 28mm 2.8 and the 50mm 1.8) if the quality is going to be noticeably better.

Any thoughts?
 07/13/2004 08:39:25 AM · #2
I have the 70-200 f/4L, and I haven't noticed a trace of softness at any zoom range. The quality is probably darn close to the prime at 200mm, so the only real difference is speed. Where do you think you'll need 200mm in low light? That's too much zoom for indoors unless you live in a cathedral, and outdoor shots will only require that speed after sunset. I'd go for the versatility of the zoom.
 07/13/2004 08:47:27 AM · #3
According to the rather dated PhotoDo they're practically identical in quality (grade 4.0 or 4.1).

I'd say go for the zoom. Fixed 200mm won't be very versatile.

Edit: Or if you think you'll need f/2.8 (which I use a fair amount, not to mention the 70-200/2.8 being f/4 with the 1.4x teleconv), save your pennies for the 70-200/2.8L.

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 08:50:36.
 07/13/2004 09:52:59 AM · #4
the 200 prime is smaller, and black - though still pretty heavy.
 07/13/2004 10:01:14 AM · #5
I know pitsaman has the 200mm f2.8 . I seem to remember a thread where he talked about it and how much he liked it.

Many people have the 70-200 f4. It's generally regarded as an excellent lens and at a relatively low price. The zoom will just be more versatile, so, unless you think you'll need f2.8, I'd go for the zoom and use the extra $$ for the 1.4x TC.

Whatever you get, have fun shopping.
07/13/2004 11:17:26 AM · #6
Would the 70-200mm F4L be sufficient for indoor events, i.e. concerts and stage performance at full zoom? I'm debeting whether to get this or cough up some serious dough for the F2.8 (not the IS version).
 07/13/2004 11:20:34 AM · #7
Originally posted by bruchen:
Would the 70-200mm F4L be sufficient for indoor events, i.e. concerts and stage performance at full zoom? I'm debeting whether to get this or cough up some serious dough for the F2.8 (not the IS version).

I would say the f/2.8 is worth the extra money for indoor or non-bright conditions.
 07/13/2004 11:22:04 AM · #8
I have the 70-200 F4. I kinda wish I had the 2.8 these days, though it is heavier. I don't much see the point of the IS version for the types of use I'd have for it though.
 07/13/2004 11:23:15 AM · #9
An image stabilized lens in that range would help compensate for low-light.

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 11:30:49.
 07/13/2004 11:27:56 AM · #10
Originally posted by wwwavenger:
An image stabilized lens in that range would help compensate for low-light.


As long as your subject is stationary, that is true.
 07/13/2004 11:31:02 AM · #11
Consider: Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX APO HSM $799.00
 07/13/2004 11:37:26 AM · #12
Originally posted by bruchen:
Would the 70-200mm F4L be sufficient for indoor events, i.e. concerts and stage performance at full zoom? I'm debeting whether to get this or cough up some serious dough for the F2.8 (not the IS version).


It's one stop. Can you live with dialing up the ISO a notch? Is one stop worth ~$500 to you? How much indoor shooting will you be doing with this lens? I guess those are what I would consider if I were choosing between the 2, but you have to decide if it's worth it to you. Sigma also makes a 70-200 f2.8 that is ~$750, but I dunno anything about its performance.

If you really want low light telephoto performance with razor thin DOF, look into the Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L USM, yeah, that's right, f ONE point EIGHT. You can't buy one new, but they are available used. It costs some serious money, and is a big MoFo, but there is really nothing else like it.

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 11:46:35.
 07/13/2004 11:39:38 AM · #13
The one stop isn't just light though - it is also depth of field.


07/13/2004 11:46:01 AM · #14
Originally posted by Gordon:
The one stop isn't just light though - it is also depth of field.


Yes, of course. I omitted that in my post. Thanks.

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 11:47:05.
 07/13/2004 11:54:08 AM · #15
For indoor use probably around 70% of the time, for fund-raising events, stage shows, receptions, and similar events.

I heard good things about the Sigma.

Yea that Canon 200mm is something to drool over. Wish...wish...wish
 07/13/2004 12:16:42 PM · #16
Originally posted by bruchen:
For indoor use probably around 70% of the time, for fund-raising events, stage shows, receptions, and similar events.

I'd recommend a 2.8 then. My friend has the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX, which performs pretty well to my Canon 70-200/2.8L. I bought the Canon because of supposed slight improvement of AF and glass quality. Ironically the thing I appreciate most is it being weather sealed. Oh, and it's cream, which has a certain amount of credential worth.

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 12:17:07.
 07/13/2004 12:51:02 PM · #17
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
If you really want low light telephoto performance with razor thin DOF, look into the Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L USM, yeah, that's right, f ONE point EIGHT. You can't buy one new, but they are available used.

BTW, the reason Canon quit making the 200/1.8L (and the 10X-zoom 35-350/3.5-5.6L; a favorite lens for a lot of PJ's) is because of the lead used in the glass elements. Canon made the decision to stop producing any leaded-glass elements for environmental reasons. The 35-350 was replaced with the recently introduced 28-300/3.5-5.6L (which looks like a pretty sweet all-around, stabilized lens, with an effective FOV of 36-390mm on the 1D Mark II). Since Nikon recently introduced a 200mm/2 lens, maybe there is some hope that Canon may bring back the 200/1.8L with new glass... because you're right, it is an awesome lens. =]

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 12:53:03.
 07/13/2004 03:02:07 PM · #18
Originally posted by EddyG:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
If you really want low light telephoto performance with razor thin DOF, look into the Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L USM, yeah, that's right, f ONE point EIGHT. You can't buy one new, but they are available used.

BTW, the reason Canon quit making the 200/1.8L (and the 10X-zoom 35-350/3.5-5.6L; a favorite lens for a lot of PJ's) is because of the lead used in the glass elements. Canon made the decision to stop producing any leaded-glass elements for environmental reasons. The 35-350 was replaced with the recently introduced 28-300/3.5-5.6L (which looks like a pretty sweet all-around, stabilized lens, with an effective FOV of 36-390mm on the 1D Mark II). Since Nikon recently introduced a 200mm/2 lens, maybe there is some hope that Canon may bring back the 200/1.8L with new glass... because you're right, it is an awesome lens. =]


I'm looking for an excuse to rent one for a week, more to play with it than anything else.

I was wondering why Canon stopped making it, especially when it seems like so many use it. I have heard of some photogs who rely on it buying as many as 3 copies in case something happens to one.
 07/13/2004 05:01:57 PM · #19
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I was wondering why Canon stopped making it, especially when it seems like so many use it. I have heard of some photogs who rely on it buying as many as 3 copies in case something happens to one.

I was looking around B&H earlier. They still have it the 35-350 listed as 'in stock', so I guess there's still a few floating about..
 07/13/2004 09:31:42 PM · #20
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I was wondering why Canon stopped making it, especially when it seems like so many use it. I have heard of some photogs who rely on it buying as many as 3 copies in case something happens to one.

I was looking around B&H earlier. They still have it the 35-350 listed as 'in stock', so I guess there's still a few floating about..


I was referring to the 200mm f1.8, not the 35-350
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/12/2025 02:18:56 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 09/12/2025 02:18:56 AM EDT.