Lenses comparable to Canon EF 70-200 4.0 L USM

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

11/03/2004 10:44:56 AM · #1

Hey ya'll! Just curious... I would like to get a quality zoom lens and I was wondering if you knew of any that are comparable to the Canon EF 70-200 4.0 L USM? Or maybe I should say lenses that come close to the Canon lens?

I am looking for a more economical alternative if there is such a beast. Thanks for the info!

terje

Apple iPhone

11/03/2004 10:45:33 AM · #2

70-200mm F2.8/IS L :-)

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

11/03/2004 10:47:47 AM · #3

Originally posted by terje:

70-200mm F2.8/IS L :-)

Not exactly more economical.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

11/03/2004 10:50:40 AM · #4

for price/ performance, that 70-200 F4 is pretty hard to beat.

The only better performing lens I own is the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro

Message edited by author 2004-11-03 10:54:07.

PaulMdx

Canon EOS-1D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

11/03/2004 10:51:31 AM · #5

How about the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX. $800, I believe.

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/03/2004 10:51:57 AM · #6

I'd argue that it's the highest value out there. I have one, as well as the 1.4x converter, and to say that I'm happy with it is a severe understatement. The only alternatives to this lens in the image quality or build department are more expensive, including the Canon 2.8 versions, and/or the Sigma 70-200 2.8 or 100-300 4. If you want to get something better than a consumer zoom, get it or save until you can afford it. It's worth it.

Originally posted by digistoune:

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/03/2004 10:52:48 AM · #7

There are a variety of third party and less expensive Canon lenses that cover that zoom range, but to my knowledge, none can compare in terms of quality to the 70-200 f4L.

The lens is pretty much regarded as a bargain in terms of bang for your buck. If you can live with a lot less bang, you can get by for less bucks

Gil P

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/03/2004 10:55:43 AM · #8

I bought the 70-200L 2.8 IS USM...very frikin' expensive...But I did test the Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO and I was pretty impressed with it but I'm not sure how much cheaper it will be....and in the end L glass is L glass.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

11/03/2004 10:56:09 AM · #9

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

How about the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX. $800, I believe.

True, but the 70-200 f4L is under $600. How much is that one stop worth?

Gil P

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

11/03/2004 10:57:52 AM · #10

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by PaulMdx:
How about the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX. $800, I believe.

True, but the 70-200 f4L is under $600. How much is that one stop worth?

it's actualy 2 stops!! (3.5!!) I can say that f2.8 is really usefull in darker conditions.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/03/2004 11:07:23 AM · #11

Sounds like the L glass is the way to go considering that 3rd party stuff is just as expensive. As for the 2.8L lens, don't think that'll happen. I just don't use a zoom with that kind of range often enough to justify the cost of that baby!

Thanks for the advice everyone!

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

11/03/2004 11:10:20 AM · #12

One stop. 2.8 to 4 is one full stop.

Originally posted by Gil P:

it's actualy 2 stops!! (3.5!!) I can say that f2.8 is really usefull in darker conditions.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

11/03/2004 11:10:44 AM · #13

The 70-200 f/4L is the Best bang for your buck! Ranks right up there with the 17-40mm f/4L. In terms of value for your money you will be hard-pressed to find better than that.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

11/03/2004 11:23:36 AM · #14

Originally posted by Gil P:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by PaulMdx:
How about the Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX. $800, I believe.

True, but the 70-200 f4L is under $600. How much is that one stop worth?

it's actualy 2 stops!! (3.5!!) I can say that f2.8 is really usefull in darker conditions.

Ummmm no, it's definitely one stop.

2.8 * sqrt(2)= 3.959 which is effectively 4.

There may be an intermediate setting at f3.5, but it's not one stop difference from f2.8

VisiBlanco

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/03/2004 11:27:06 AM · #15

The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is a pretty decent lens. Roberts imaging has a used one for only $400 (a steal) //www.robertsimaging.com/cmUsed.jsp

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

11/03/2004 11:30:39 AM · #16

First I have the 70-200/F4L and it's fantastic, though a bit heavy and powerful when walking around. I would never go anywhere with just this lens (did it once on a walk, it was a mistake).

What are you looking for, how much more tele than the 17-55? Do you mind carrying multiple lenses everywhere?

One alternative (or supplement) is to replace the 17-55 with the Sigma 18-125. That gives you more range and it's a great walk-around lens (though not the quietest). Had mine for a couple of weeks and I recommend it. It costs $249 at Hunts in Boston by mail order.

But I do also like having the 70-200/F4L. And it does take fantastic shots. Just not a good carry everywhere lens.

Also, again, not the same quality as L, but Tamron just announced a 18-200mm lens for a lot less. I don't yet know how it will perform (certainly not like the L). But much cheaper, and again, good for walking around. See their website.

Message edited by author 2004-11-03 11:31:41.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

11/03/2004 11:37:57 AM · #17

Originally posted by nshapiro:

I already have a good walk around lens - the Tamron XR Di something or other. Love that lens! And yes, those super range zooms look interesting but I have heard so many times that the image quality on those things just isn't up to par.

Do have one more question about the 70-200 4.0L; Do you have to use a tripod collar with it?

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

11/03/2004 11:43:38 AM · #18

Originally posted by digistoune:

No, it's relatively light for a lens that size.

Which Tamron XR Di do you have and like?

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

11/03/2004 11:44:29 AM · #19

You can get that lens for $554.95. The tripod ring is nice to have but it is kinda expensive at $119.20. The f/4 version is lighter than the f/2.8 version, so you might be able to do without it.

Gil P

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/03/2004 11:48:09 AM · #20

Originally posted by jimmythefish:

One stop. 2.8 to 4 is one full stop.

Originally posted by Gil P:

it's actualy 2 stops!! (3.5!!) I can say that f2.8 is really usefull in darker conditions.

doh!

mariomel

Canon EOS-5D

11/03/2004 11:58:00 AM · #21

Originally posted by doctornick:

You can get that lens for $554.95. The tripod ring is nice to have but it is kinda expensive at $119.20. The f/4 version is lighter than the f/2.8 version, so you might be able to do without it.

I just picked up a "Canon Refurbished" used 70-200 f/4 L from B&H for $469. They had several in stock last week. Call them, they might have some more left. The lens is perfect, not a mark on it. Takes great photos too. It's not really very heavy or large for a high quality lens. I had the Sigma 70-300 APO before and it doesn't even compare. Get one, you won't regret it!

11/03/2004 12:09:01 PM · #22

Originally posted by mariomel:

Originally posted by doctornick:
You can get that lens for $554.95. The tripod ring is nice to have but it is kinda expensive at $119.20. The f/4 version is lighter than the f/2.8 version, so you might be able to do without it.

I just picked up a "Canon Refurbished" used 70-200 f/4 L from B&H for $469. They had several in stock last week. Call them, they might have some more left. The lens is perfect, not a mark on it. Takes great photos too. It's not really very heavy or large for a high quality lens. I had the Sigma 70-300 APO before and it doesn't even compare. Get one, you won't regret it!

So you're the one who bought that lens! LOL I almost did buy it but waited to long ;-)

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/03/2004 12:11:04 PM · #23

Originally posted by nshapiro:

Originally posted by digistoune:

I already have a good walk around lens - the Tamron XR Di something or other. Love that lens! And yes, those super range zooms look interesting but I have heard so many times that the image quality on those things just isn't up to par.

Do have one more question about the 70-200 4.0L; Do you have to use a tripod collar with it?

No, it's relatively light for a lens that size.

Which Tamron XR Di do you have and like?

It's the 2.8f Tamron 28-75 - sorry I can't recall all the little numbers/letters.. Several folks here at DPC have that lens and I've yet to here of anyone that didn't like it. It rocks! I picked one up used from KEH for a song :-)

mariomel

Canon EOS-5D

11/03/2004 12:13:36 PM · #24

Originally posted by digistoune:

So you're the one who bought that lens! LOL I almost did buy it but waited to long ;-)

They had several. They came from a show in NYC. When I decided to buy, it was no longer on the website, so I called, and they still had a few. Give them a call on their toll-free number. Can't hurt to try. Good luck!

KevinRiggs

Canon EOS-1Ds