Reading mode: Light Dark

70-200 f 4.0 instead of 70-300 D0

Go to last post
B

Barbados

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
271
Reaction score
0
Location
Portland, OR, US
Initially I posted the following several days ago:

"I have searched the Forums and not found much on the 70-300 DO. Was all set to get the 70-200 2.8 since I use only ambient light and shoot hand held. Then I started to evaluate the 70-300. Since I do a lot of candid, on the fly, hand held portraits in remote places in the world, maybe the weight and size of the 70-300 are an advantage. I've already got a Canon 16-35 f 2.8 and the 24-70 f 2.8. I love the build quality of these. I did use a 28-135mm for years but now am spoiled by the L quality and most of all the fixed 2.8.

However, the white L lens is big, heavy, and may scare people off. They are much likely not to notice or to mind a smaller black, 70-300. I'm probably more likely to carry and use the smaller 70-300. Yet somehow I feel I will be compromising in quality. I won't carry a monopod or tripod though.

I'm leaning towards the 70-300 DO for now though, because of the practicalities.

Any thoughts from someone who does travel photos?

My galleries are on http://www.pbase.com/barbados ."

Up date on 1/1/05: Thanks to multiple replies and reconsidering the weight of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS I've now decided on the 70-200 f/2.8.

I've seen the posts and samples of the 70-300 DO, read the reviews and the testing on Luminous Landscape and find it not sharp enough. I don't want to compromise on image quality. That would be more impt to me than the additional reach. Unfortunately, my local camera shop doesn't rent out this lens. I can "try it out" on my camera out on the street head to head with the 70-200 f 4.0 but can't hope to reproduce the sort of shooting conditions I want to use it in in the middle of a dreary, rainy Portland, OR winter.

So, I'm leaning towards the 70-200 f/4.0. Last call for anyone who uses the 70-300 DO for people type portraits, hand held in ambient light before I plunk down the credit card for thie 70-200 f4.0 next week.

--

 
someone who wants one thing, has decided on something else, but is leaning towards something different.

You've got to admit thats amusing.

Hope you get the information you want :)
 
If you are being sarcastic it's lost on me. My question should be very clear. If I haven't made myself clear, I'll restate the question for you. The choice is between the 70-200 f4.0 and the 70-300 DO for hand held, candid travel portraits. The sample of the type of work that I do is in my galleries. Initially I'd considered the 70-200 f2.8 IS but decided against it as too heavy.

It was the helpful replies that helped me make that decision. I am still leaning towards the 70-200 f4.0 and looking for anyone with real world use of the 70-300 DO in the conditions that I'd use it in to give opinion or links to their work. I will be buying the lens in the next week or so, before the Canon rebate period ends.

Why would you bother to contribute a reply to this thread only to belittle my questions? And I did see the emoticom but that doesn't mitigate the needless answer that you've posted in response to my genuine question.
Goodwood said:
someone who wants one thing, has decided on something else, but is
leaning towards something different.

You've got to admit thats amusing.

Hope you get the information you want :)
Click to expand...
--

 
Its hard to decide between performance, price, weight, quality etc. so I understand your problem very well. Just a bit of informal banter, sorry if it wasn't appreciated.
 
Goodwood said:
Its hard to decide between performance, price, weight, quality etc.
so I understand your problem very well. Just a bit of informal
banter, sorry if it wasn't appreciated.
Click to expand...
--
fredyr

I have the 70-300 DO but don't know what to tell you as I live in a country where the sun even in winter blinds me. I am a small elderly woman and love it. However when I recently travelled I took my pro 1 as it is so small, takes great photos but I have a monopod for it with a quick release plate for night photos. The DO with the hood is so conspicuous I could never get some shots I got. And I do think one needs the hood. Looking at your photos I have a feeling you know more than me what you need for a trip as you have obviously travelled quite a bit and managed a lot of portraits without a problem. Whatever you get take raw and maybe buy a photo storage device. I am looking at the VP 6210 which hopefully in January will have an upgrade and one will be able to view Canon RAW. CES 2005 is on Jan 6th. Good luck.
 
Barbados said:
If you are being sarcastic it's lost on me. My question should be
very clear. If I haven't made myself clear, I'll restate the
question for you. The choice is between the 70-200 f4.0 and the
70-300 DO for hand held, candid travel portraits. The sample of the
type of work that I do is in my galleries. Initially I'd considered
the 70-200 f2.8 IS but decided against it as too heavy.
Click to expand...
Not sure how much help I can be, but here in So. Cal, there's a chain of electronic stores called Fry's (not sure what other states they're in)

I was surprised to see that they sell the DO lens (while they do sell cameras, they aren't a camera store, per say, more computer equipment, memory cards, computer parts, etc.)

What's nice is, they give 30 days to try or return all purchases, with money back. This would allow you to try the lens out, IF there's a Fry's in your area.

As for the 70-200 f/4, it's probably my next lens. I've tried it out, and it's a NICE lens... don't know anyone who doens't like thiers.

Check http://www.pbase.com and do a search on the DO lens, and you can view (usually) hunderds of samples of photos, taken with that lens.

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_70-300_45-56_do_is_usm

Also, go to http://www.fredmiranda.com and you can read reviews of any Canon lens from actual owners.

Good luck!

--
http://www.pbase.com/joshua
'I can resist anything but temptation'
 
Barbados said:
Initially I posted the following several days ago:

"I have searched the Forums and not found much on the 70-300 DO.
Was all set to get the 70-200 2.8 since I use only ambient light
and shoot hand held. Then I started to evaluate the 70-300. Since I
do a lot of candid, on the fly, hand held portraits in remote
places in the world, maybe the weight and size of the 70-300 are an
advantage. I've already got a Canon 16-35 f 2.8 and the 24-70 f
2.8. I love the build quality of these. I did use a 28-135mm for
years but now am spoiled by the L quality and most of all the fixed
2.8.

However, the white L lens is big, heavy, and may scare people off.
They are much likely not to notice or to mind a smaller black,
70-300. I'm probably more likely to carry and use the smaller
70-300. Yet somehow I feel I will be compromising in quality. I
won't carry a monopod or tripod though.

I'm leaning towards the 70-300 DO for now though, because of the
practicalities.

Any thoughts from someone who does travel photos?

My galleries are on http://www.pbase.com/barbados ."

Up date on 1/1/05: Thanks to multiple replies and reconsidering the
weight of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS I've now decided on the 70-200 f/2.8.

I've seen the posts and samples of the 70-300 DO, read the reviews
and the testing on Luminous Landscape and find it not sharp enough.
I don't want to compromise on image quality. That would be more
impt to me than the additional reach. Unfortunately, my local
camera shop doesn't rent out this lens. I can "try it out" on my
camera out on the street head to head with the 70-200 f 4.0 but
can't hope to reproduce the sort of shooting conditions I want to
use it in in the middle of a dreary, rainy Portland, OR winter.

So, I'm leaning towards the 70-200 f/4.0. Last call for anyone who
uses the 70-300 DO for people type portraits, hand held in ambient
light before I plunk down the credit card for thie 70-200 f4.0 next
week.

--

Click to expand...
 
Thanks Fredy. I agree about shooting RAW. I've had a 30Gig MIndStor digital wallet for years and that has served me well as far as photo storage and I may need a larger Gig one in the near future.

Do you have your photos with the 70-300 DO posted anywhere? I don't use a tripod or monopd ever though, too cumbersome for the type of stuff that I shoot. I do everything hand held and the IS on the 28-135mm that I've used in the past and that is on the DO may really be useful. I'm still undecided about that lens. However, I know and trust the image and build quality of the 70-200 f 4.0. I agree about the hood on the DO. It has known flare problems, especially in backlit situations.

The Pro 1 is a great little camera. Sometimes I wonder if I should be using it instead of lugging all my interchangeable lenses and DSLR around. I am about to buy a lens (either the 70-200 f 4.0 or the 70-300DO) and a 20D in the next week. The D60 will become backup, it's had a lot of use and I've got to have a back up camera for remote travel. My next trip is to Ethiopia. I may get a 50 f1.4 prime too. And then I have had moments of just wondering if I should forget the 20D and get a Pro 1 instead!
Fredy Ross said:
--
fredyr
I have the 70-300 DO but don't know what to tell you as I live in a
country where the sun even in winter blinds me. I am a small
elderly woman and love it. However when I recently travelled I took
my pro 1 as it is so small, takes great photos but I have a monopod
for it with a quick release plate for night photos. The DO with the
hood is so conspicuous I could never get some shots I got. And I do
think one needs the hood. Looking at your photos I have a feeling
you know more than me what you need for a trip as you have
obviously travelled quite a bit and managed a lot of portraits
without a problem. Whatever you get take raw and maybe buy a photo
storage device. I am looking at the VP 6210 which hopefully in
January will have an upgrade and one will be able to view Canon
RAW. CES 2005 is on Jan 6th. Good luck.
Click to expand...
--

 
Hi Fredy, I just saw your profile as I was trying to find if you might have photos posted. I used to live in Jerusalem and Eilat and Dahab (when it was d'Zahav) . That was in the late 1970s.
 
...and I'm selling it -I've got a 70-300 DO on order. I don't do as much candid photography as you, but I do a lot of hiking with my camera. This is what I've found from using the 70-200 F4 L:

1) The weight of the lens really isn't that much of an issue -I've hiked all over the place with mine. The problem is how the weight is distributed. It seems to be all at the front end of the lens, and changing lenses always seems awkward. It's also difficult to hold it steady because the lens isn't balanced.

2) The lens is a permanent 6.8" long minus the lens hood (which is huge) -try stuffing it into a little camera bag. All too often I find myself leaving it at home on day trips cause I don't want to carry a big lens around -and I don't care how good the image quality is, if you leave it at home it doesn't matter...

So I'm going with the 70-300 DO to compliment my 17-85 EF-S. Two lenses, about 28-480mm total field of view, and both with IS. Add the 20 D and a LowePro photo runner bag and that's going to be my setup as soon as the gear arrives in the mail.

Hope this helps :)

Regards,
John
--
My gallery: http://www.pbase.com/dalantech/root
 
Barbados said:
Hi Fredy, I just saw your profile as I was trying to find if you
might have photos posted. I used to live in Jerusalem and Eilat and
Dahab (when it was d'Zahav) . That was in the late 1970s.
Click to expand...
--
fredyr

I have my photos on line but on a free site so all very compressed and don't show as well as on pbase but is free. The album from Greece was taken with the pro 1. The rest are a mixture of photos taken with my G3, pro 90IS and Rebel and the pro 1. The first two cameras have been passed on to my children as I print large and wanted more megapixels. Have been thinking about the 20D but have run out of children.

You may enjoy the photos of Israel if you once lived here as I am sure lots of things have changed since the 70's. If I live long enough even Tel Aviv may be beautiful. My albums are at
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1717288

If you know luminous-landscape he also took the DO on his trip to Banglades because of its portability but then he took a 300mm 2.8 too. I guess it depends on how much one wants to carry. I just can't carry a lot and my caddy took sick so I have to carry everything myself. My biggest complaint regarding travel is dirty train and bus windows or being with non=photographers and having to take photos on the run.

At least you know that Ethopia will have a lot of sun, so the DO could be the winner and a polariser may help too.
Look forward to your photos on your return and have a great time. fredyr
 
Remember the DO has 3rd Generation IS, with 3 stops capability. This allows me to take shots handheld at night at 1/4 sec!

http://www.pbase.com/ed1994/image/37825498

Never could do that with the other lens - however of course the DO is slower to begin with so that should be taken into consideration

I do think the 70-300 DO has had undue unfair press as people seem to believe they can compare the green ring with a red one (reasoned upon expense) - but heck - the lens I believe is sharp and good - maybe not pure "L" quality - but better than the consumer range for sure

If you want sharpness ditch the 70-200/2.8L and get a 85/1.8 + 135/2L + 1.4X TC (probably works out cheaper - and somewhat sharper)

imho!
ed
Barbados said:
Initially I posted the following several days ago:

"I have searched the Forums and not found much on the 70-300 DO.
Was all set to get the 70-200 2.8 since I use only ambient light
and shoot hand held. Then I started to evaluate the 70-300. Since I
do a lot of candid, on the fly, hand held portraits in remote
places in the world, maybe the weight and size of the 70-300 are an
advantage. I've already got a Canon 16-35 f 2.8 and the 24-70 f
2.8. I love the build quality of these. I did use a 28-135mm for
years but now am spoiled by the L quality and most of all the fixed
2.8.

However, the white L lens is big, heavy, and may scare people off.
They are much likely not to notice or to mind a smaller black,
70-300. I'm probably more likely to carry and use the smaller
70-300. Yet somehow I feel I will be compromising in quality. I
won't carry a monopod or tripod though.

I'm leaning towards the 70-300 DO for now though, because of the
practicalities.

Any thoughts from someone who does travel photos?

My galleries are on http://www.pbase.com/barbados ."

Up date on 1/1/05: Thanks to multiple replies and reconsidering the
weight of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS I've now decided on the 70-200 f/2.8.

I've seen the posts and samples of the 70-300 DO, read the reviews
and the testing on Luminous Landscape and find it not sharp enough.
I don't want to compromise on image quality. That would be more
impt to me than the additional reach. Unfortunately, my local
camera shop doesn't rent out this lens. I can "try it out" on my
camera out on the street head to head with the 70-200 f 4.0 but
can't hope to reproduce the sort of shooting conditions I want to
use it in in the middle of a dreary, rainy Portland, OR winter.

So, I'm leaning towards the 70-200 f/4.0. Last call for anyone who
uses the 70-300 DO for people type portraits, hand held in ambient
light before I plunk down the credit card for thie 70-200 f4.0 next
week.

--

Click to expand...
 
Primes aren't practical for me now due not always having the option to zoom with my feet. I'm looking for zooms for that reason. Although I also am considering a 50 f1.4 prime. I still need a zoom for the 70-200 range.
Lumix Ed said:
Remember the DO has 3rd Generation IS, with 3 stops capability.
This allows me to take shots handheld at night at 1/4 sec!

http://www.pbase.com/ed1994/image/37825498

Never could do that with the other lens - however of course the DO
is slower to begin with so that should be taken into consideration

I do think the 70-300 DO has had undue unfair press as people seem
to believe they can compare the green ring with a red one (reasoned
upon expense) - but heck - the lens I believe is sharp and good -
maybe not pure "L" quality - but better than the consumer range for
sure

If you want sharpness ditch the 70-200/2.8L and get a 85/1.8 +
135/2L + 1.4X TC (probably works out cheaper - and somewhat sharper)

imho!
ed
Click to expand...
 
Looking at your gallery leads me to believe you live near Portland. I live in Tualatin. We sure have a lot of great photo opportunities close at hand. I wish I could help you, but the Fry's idea might be your best bet. I am leaning towards the 70-200L 2.8 IS. The weight factor has made me think twice as well. I really want it though. We will see. Good luck with your research. It is hard work figuring out what lense is the best choice. There are too many options.
 
Barbados said:
So, I'm leaning towards the 70-200 f/4.0. Last call for anyone who
uses the 70-300 DO for people type portraits, hand held in ambient
light before I plunk down the credit card for thie 70-200 f4.0 next
week.
Click to expand...
I followed your threads as well as a number of others on this forum. Lots of positive comments on the DO lens. The Miranda forum however, is very negative towards the DO.

So, I think I'll go with the 70-200 f/4. Since I'm looking for more reach, I'm looking at TCs. 1.4 vs 2 Tamron.

I think (as you do) that the quality of the lens will outweigh (no pun) the advantages of the DO lens. Good luck with your purchase.

peter
 
NE 19th at Marshall in Portland. They've got the lenses and I've had both on my camera in the store. They also have a 30 day return on purchases. Unfortunately, they don't have a copy of the 7-300 DO or the 70-200 f4.0 in the rental department. So, even if I buy the DO lens with the intention of returning it if I don't like it a) I wont have the 70-200 f4.0 for a head-to-head comparison of images in the same conditions and b) this grey rainy Portland winter weather isn't similiar to the conditions under which I'll ultimately be using the lens.

I am hoping to make my decison in time to take advantage of the Canon rebate that ends Jan 31. I'll have a triple rebate with this purchase, plus the 20D body, plus the 24-70 f2.8 I bought this past Oct.

They do have a 70-200 f2.8 IS in the rental dept at Pro Photo Supply.
bigwaved said:
Looking at your gallery leads me to believe you live near Portland.
I live in Tualatin. We sure have a lot of great photo opportunities
close at hand. I wish I could help you, but the Fry's idea might be
your best bet. I am leaning towards the 70-200L 2.8 IS. The weight
factor has made me think twice as well. I really want it though. We
will see. Good luck with your research. It is hard work figuring
out what lense is the best choice. There are too many options.
Click to expand...
--

 
I wanted to go there for a visit today, but they are closed. Maybe tomorrow. Did you try out the 70-200 2.8L IS? I have a 300d right now. I am now starting to build my lense collection. I have the 50 1.8 II and the kit lens. I am hoping to fill inthe kit lens range in the future, but for the present I am planning on filling the midrange zoom for events that my little girl will eventually be participating in (along with fun shots around the city and landscapes) and a flash. Do you have good luck with Pro Photo Supply? How do they compare in price with B and H?
 
Pro Photo is always closed on Sundays. I try to support a bricks and mortar store. I get great service from Pro Photo and have had lots of help and advice from them. If I have any concerns, I can just return the lens to them. If I pay a bit more there than at B and H or some other megastore, it's still worth it to me to support Pro Photo.

I have tried the 70-200 f2.8 IS. It's just too big and too heavy for my needs. It would stay at home or in the gear bag. It isn't of use to me if it won't get used.

bigwaved wrote:
[snip] Do you have good luck with Pro Photo
bigwaved said:
Supply? How do they compare in price with B and H?
Click to expand...
--

 
I have the 70-200 2.8L IS and the 70-300 DO, shoot with a 10D. I’ve used the 70-200 for about 2 years but wanted a lighter, less conspicuous lens for travel, hence the DO. In my experience the DO is a very good lens by its own merits, but not on a par with the 70-200. I’m satisfied with its performance, and it is a very good travel lens. I prefer to take the DO as this saves weight & makes room for another lens, I usually travel with 3 or 4 primes & zooms.

Here are a few shots from Myanmar last summer with the DO, not many portraits however:
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/31476185
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/31436926
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/32452253
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/32452254

And a few from a buddy photog’s Singapore gallery (same lens, different 10D body):
http://www.pbase.com/r53lanc/image/30408838
http://www.pbase.com/r53lanc/image/30318559
http://www.pbase.com/r53lanc/image/30319557
http://www.pbase.com/r53lanc/image/30318864

Apologies for adding to the dilema :)
Barbados said:
Initially I posted the following several days ago:

"I have searched the Forums and not found much on the 70-300 DO.
Was all set to get the 70-200 2.8 since I use only ambient light
and shoot hand held. Then I started to evaluate the 70-300. Since I
do a lot of candid, on the fly, hand held portraits in remote
places in the world, maybe the weight and size of the 70-300 are an
advantage. I've already got a Canon 16-35 f 2.8 and the 24-70 f
2.8. I love the build quality of these. I did use a 28-135mm for
years but now am spoiled by the L quality and most of all the fixed
2.8.

However, the white L lens is big, heavy, and may scare people off.
They are much likely not to notice or to mind a smaller black,
70-300. I'm probably more likely to carry and use the smaller
70-300. Yet somehow I feel I will be compromising in quality. I
won't carry a monopod or tripod though.

I'm leaning towards the 70-300 DO for now though, because of the
practicalities.

Any thoughts from someone who does travel photos?

My galleries are on http://www.pbase.com/barbados ."

Up date on 1/1/05: Thanks to multiple replies and reconsidering the
weight of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS I've now decided on the 70-200 f/2.8.

I've seen the posts and samples of the 70-300 DO, read the reviews
and the testing on Luminous Landscape and find it not sharp enough.
I don't want to compromise on image quality. That would be more
impt to me than the additional reach. Unfortunately, my local
camera shop doesn't rent out this lens. I can "try it out" on my
camera out on the street head to head with the 70-200 f 4.0 but
can't hope to reproduce the sort of shooting conditions I want to
use it in in the middle of a dreary, rainy Portland, OR winter.

So, I'm leaning towards the 70-200 f/4.0. Last call for anyone who
uses the 70-300 DO for people type portraits, hand held in ambient
light before I plunk down the credit card for thie 70-200 f4.0 next
week.

--

Click to expand...
--
Best regards,
Doug
http://pbase.com/dougj
 
Thanks for the links Doug. Those are the sort of photos that I take. I noticed you used the 270-300mm end of the range for those images. I still can't help but think that the 70-200 f4.0 will give sharper images, better bokeh, better colors. I'd choose the image quality over that extra focal length reach. I liked the rest of your Myanmar galleries with the 17-40 too. I'm going back to look some more.
Doug J said:
I have the 70-200 2.8L IS and the 70-300 DO, shoot with a 10D. I’ve
used the 70-200 for about 2 years but wanted a lighter, less
conspicuous lens for travel, hence the DO. In my experience the DO
is a very good lens by its own merits, but not on a par with the
70-200. I’m satisfied with its performance, and it is a very good
travel lens. I prefer to take the DO as this saves weight & makes
room for another lens, I usually travel with 3 or 4 primes & zooms.

Here are a few shots from Myanmar last summer with the DO, not many
portraits however:
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/31476185
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/31436926
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/32452253
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/32452254
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top