Is it worth buying a used 70-200 f4 L (NON IS Edition)

Started Dec 3, 2012 | Questions thread
brightcolours Forum Pro • Posts: 15,722

Steve Balcombe wrote:

TrevorNews wrote:

Low Light shooting is not of concern to me. I don't use IS either. What are your thoughts about the optical quality of this lens. Share your thoughts and any photos if you like. Thanks.

I have a few photos in my gallery. I use a Flash and will most probably use this lens with a Extn Tube for close-up photography and/or for the standard range the lens offers on a 7D or 5D MK II.

Would you suggest the collar for this lens?

I don't intend to spend the money on the IS version or the newer version, I would get the MPE-65 for that money.

Sounds like your main interest is close up/macro work, and I wouldn't recommend it for that. This is not because of any optical issues - it's actually very good with extension tubes when stopped down to f8 or f/11.

It is fine wide open, even.

The problem is that with a full set of Kenko tubes (68 mm) you have a very long and IMHO clumsy setup, the inconvenience of fitting/removing tubes, and only 0.6x magnification.

You do not need a full extension tube set for close ups.

Acceptable, perhaps, if you already have the lens and want to turn your hand to macro occasionally for the price of a set of tubes. But not as a first choice when buying from scratch.

For the same ball park cost you could have a Sigma 150/2.8 Macro, if you can find one. For not a lot more, you could have the OS version.

Macro and close up are not the same thing. I can't make the shots I make with my 70-200mm f4 L USM with a Sigma 150mm f2.8. Both lenses have their own charm and areas to excel in.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow