70-200 f4 vs. 70-300IS (non DO)

[John Peplow]

I have the same combo along with the Sigma 10-20 and am very pleased with the 70-200 f/4. I traded in my Sigma 70-300 APO Macro and have absolutely no regrets. The Canon is superior in every respect. I actually considered the Canon 70-300 IS, but the lure of constant f/4, L glass and superoir optics won out.

 

[rich50010]

Hi John,

Just saying 'Hi' cos you have the same surname as me....and it's not a common one

I believe some relatives (Uncle and Aunt?) of my father moved to London, Ontario in either the 50s or the 60s. How long has your clan been out that way? I'm a Peplow from Gloucestershire, UK, by the way.

Cheers,

Rich
--
http://www.aviationuk.fotopic.net

 

[Gisli]

I got one this summer and I have just sold my tamron 70-300 because I stopped using it when I got 70-200 f/4 L color contrast and sharpness all in one the tammy was sharp but the L is much better.
200mm f/8



200mm f/5



200mm f/4



--
Best Regards
Gisli Kristinsson
--
20D
10-20 EX HSM sigma
24-105 f/4 USM L
70-200 f/4 USM L
18-55 efs
28-105 F3.5-4,5 usm

 

[bumcrack bob]

I have the 70-300IS and its a good lens, pictures are very sharp, with good contrast most times, and depending on lighting etc i have had trouble sorting between shots taken with the 70-300IS or my 70-200IS. The 70-300 is not as quick to focus.

Pic with 70-300IS at the tele 300 end, on my 300D Rebel, and was not in perfect light.



and this one just to compare, with the 70-200IS also my old 300D

 

[Jason198448]

I go to church with a James (Jim) and Sue Peplow here in Chicago. He's a great guy. I think he works as a machinist for Grainger. When I saw your name I immediately thought "hey, there's another Peplow, that's not a common name".

--

--Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population.
--Albert Einstein

 

[John Peplow]

Hi Rich:

Nice to hear from you. Our name is certainly very rare. My family was originally from England before the First World War. I have some genealogical stuff that might be of interest to you. Maybe we're even related somehow!
If you are interested please email me privately at

[email protected]

I don't want to clutter up the list with too much personal stuff, but I'd be interested in your side of the family too.

Yours truly
John

 

[John Peplow]

We just keep popping up in the strangest places. I do have some distant relatives in the US, they might even be one of them.

 

[steve maec]

I hace the 7--300is and love mine.The IS does help on the 300 end.
--
http://public.fotki.com/stevemaec/website/

 

[Torque124]

I am going to repeat this untill you get annoyed and buy one; it is something about this lense that will please your eyes ... Don't get fooled into the "amateurish" 70-300 IS ; you are an enthusiast and you deserve the best

Stuff the IS , stuff the 300mm ,you don't want convenience , you want just the best IQ you can get

The focus is so quick that it actually snaps into focus from first touch of shutter button ; it will shake your hand.

If you are the person that buys a car to take you from A to B, then this is a good time to change ! Buy it for the pleasure of using it and the end result , not for the relaxed indifference of comodity ...

--
http://www.pbase.com/mariush

 

[HappySnappy]

Yup agreed, I too have found the reach and IS a big plus factor.

I often see posts suggesting just add a x1.4 teleconverter but that isn't an alternative solution as the more the reach the faster the shutter is required for a shake free shot.

I find non sunny daylight shots with 1/200th shutter speeds reasonably attainable but 1/300th can becomes quite tough and IS becomes an important factor.

Now the 4L IS would be a different but right now it's holding a very high price tag. I hope that once it's easily available the online dealer prices will drop and then I may consider upgrading.
--
Sure I've got a photographic memory...... just needs developing!

 

[netspots]

you don't want convenience...

Nah, who wants convenience? Highly over-rated.

hee-hee... ;-)

 

[thw]

Stuff the IS , stuff the 300mm ,you don't want convenience , you
want just the best IQ you can get
The focus is so quick that it actually snaps into focus from first
touch of shutter button ; it will shake your hand.

vote for the 70-200 not so much for the IQ, but for the better build (no zoom-creep), parfocal quality and much better AF.

Personally, I have the 70-300 IS and really like the IS.

If you have the money, I will suggest the 70-200 f/4 IS.

-------------------------------------------
See the colors of my world in:
thw.smugmug.com

 

[JackM]

I'd go for range over quality. Me, I love big prints. I'm decorating my whole house with 8x10s, 11x14s, 16x20s and 20x30s. Which, of course, has infected me with the L bug.

 

[netspots]

vote for the 70-200 not so much for the IQ, but for the better
build (no zoom-creep), parfocal quality and much better AF.

How much better is the AF on the 70-200 vs. the 70-300?

 

[netspots]

If you rarely make big prints...
I'd go for range over quality. Me, I love big prints. I'm
decorating my whole house with 8x10s, 11x14s, 16x20s and 20x30s.
Which, of course, has infected me with the L bug.

Does that mean that if 4x6 or 5x7 prints are made, there's no noticeable difference between these two lenses?

 

[adam c]

Now the 4L IS would be a different but right now it's holding a
very high price tag. I hope that once it's easily available the
online dealer prices will drop and then I may consider upgrading.

I agree - the price is too high for me and I doubt it will drop by much in the near future.

 

[ssab]

vote for the 70-200 not so much for the IQ, but for the better
build (no zoom-creep), parfocal quality and much better AF.

Personally, I have the 70-300 IS and really like the IS.

There is no zoom creep on my replacement 70-300 even with a hood on, vertical and jiggled to try and make it creep. Maybe they still vary a bit, unless yours is an early one and you've not had it " fixed ".

 

[JimH]

To me, IS is a feature I really want to have. So the introduction of the 70-200 f/4L IS sounded very attractive to me. But at the price that it's running right now, I'm not so tempted.

Instead, I'm more likely to look at paying just a little a bit more and getting the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS. Or save up a bit more yet and get the highly regarded 70-200 f/2.8L IS

Now if the 70-200 f/4L IS was about $350 or so less, then more people might be tempted by it. But paying $700 more right now to get the IS (as much as I love IS) is just out of line.

For now, I'm plenty happy with the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS because the IS is wonderful for my kind of shooting.

I could not have gotten this shot without the IS:



This was hand held at 300mm at 1/15th of a second, ISO 1600. I wanted the extra DOF of f/8 for this shot.

--
Jim H.

 

[JackM]

Does that mean that if 4x6 or 5x7 prints are made, there's no
noticeable difference between these two lenses?

I've never shot either lens, so I can't say for sure. But I can say this... I have lots of 4x6s and some 5x7s from my point-n-shoot days (4mp Canon S45) that rival 4x6s and 5x7s taken with my 30D. The only thing that identifies a small print taken with my 30D is the better background blur.

 

[netspots]

I have lots of 4x6s and some 5x7s from my point-n-shoot
days (4mp Canon S45) that rival 4x6s and 5x7s taken with my 30D.
The only thing that identifies a small print taken with my 30D is
the better background blur.

Interesting. Thanks.