Canon 70-200mm F4L IS II sample gallery

//It is fair for readers to assume that this is a hidden advertisement for the camera, rather than the lens.//

I of course cannot change peoples' opinions, but 'advertising' is not the purpose here. Aside from the fact that I doubt even Sony would like us using a Canon lens on their camera instead of their own 70-200mm F4, the majority of images were taken with a 5D IV, 5DS R and 80D.

The reason I chose to use an a7R III for some of the images is because when we shoot Canon sample galleries, we always use Live View for the best possible chance at nailing critical focus. For all sample galleries, we also try to bias towards high megapixel cameras. In this case, the 5DS R in live view is simply too slow for me to photograph moving subjects like the band that I photographed for this gallery.

The a7R III wasn't perfect, either - with an adapter, it basically refuses to focus off-center. But anything in the central region is in-focus, every time, because of on-sensor PDAF.

Beyond that, the reason we err on the side of using a Sony in some cases to ensure that we are getting in-focus images is that it is also a colossal waste of time for us to go out to an event specifically to take photos for a sample gallery, and return with a large number out of focus.

This doesn't happen very time, but the 5DS R's 50MP are not very forgiving of focus errors, and sometimes it's easier just to adapt a lens than to spend the time calibrating it for different zoom settings and focus distances.

Same goes for the 5D IV - its 30MP are a bit more forgiving, but we simply stand a better chance of getting a greater number of in-focus images by using autofocus off of the imaging sensor, whether it's a Canon camera or otherwise.

Lastly, I do apologize for the heat and haze. But there are just some things out of our control, and we do feel that the images here are worthwhile enough to give an impression of the lens, regardless of the atmospheric conditions that we're experiencing.

Cary, thanks for all the detailed reply,
FORGIVEN!!! :)
Of course the 5DsR is more of a tripod landscape camera than action.
Keep up the good work.

It is terrifying to me—and I would imagine all Canon owners. You are a real photographer, so if you can’t get this lens to achieve reliable focus with any of Canon’s latest cameras that is a serious problem. Takeshi Mitarai must be spinning in his grave.

Is it this model of lens in particular that can’t focus accurately or does this happen with all Canon lenses? Have you alerted your contacts inside Canon that they have a potential game ender on their hands?

@SmilerGrogan it's not terrifying when you understand what Carey Rose is saying and the limitations of different camera systems.

I read what he said: that for Canons he has to use live view to make sure he nails focus. In other words focusing through the viewfinder is unreliable.
And 80 to 90 percent of all sports photographers use Canon cameras and we know they’re not using live view which is why this is terrifying cubed.
Hopefully Canon can sell their camera business to Ricoh before this gets out and it’s value falls to zero.

//I think going forward that it’s best practice for DPREVIEW to use the same brand of body as the lens ( if that is possible ) otherwise, you introduce variables that may marr the best possible outcome.//

That is generally what we aim to do, but for (lengthy) reasons listed in a later comment, we sometimes adapt them. That said, nearly 75% of images in this gallery were taken on Canon cameras. The other 25% were taken on a Sony body in an effort to actually attain the best possible outcome - please read the other comment if you're curious as to why.

//it’s not a lemon and perhaps deserves reshooting on a 20mp Canon body.//

I don't think it's a lemon at all. But it's far more valuable IMO for our users to download and re-size 50MP images to 20MP to get an idea of how it'll look on those bodies, rather than shooting everything on a 1D X II and having people complain about a lack of high MP files. It's easier to go one way than the other.

Thanks for clarifying matters Carey. I’ll admit I didn’t check image metadata ( I’m on my iPhone, and can’t seem to bring it up), so I assumed from other posters that all shots were on a Sony. That’s my bad, sorry.

It also makes sense to shoot it on as high a megapixel camera as you can.

Finally I meant that most critics posting here seemed to imply it was a lemon lens, not you.

Thanks again for taking the time to reply to me and others, all the negativity here must be wearing sometimes. Best wishes

Carey, you should ignore the troll-like comment. It was inaccurate, and uncalled for. I expect photos taken in haze to show how a lens can handle it. Many other less-than-ideal scenarios are appropriate for showing what a lens can do. Unless the photographer refuses to shoot in less than ideal (by their definition) conditions. Ansel Adams used to declare he hated "balled headed skies." (Cloudless).

Bad lenses can look good in ideal situations, great lenses still look great in atrocious conditions. As a professional photographer (since '84) I really appreciate how good lenses conquer bad light.

So don't apologize where there is none called for. Your photos did a good job of showing some characteristics of the lens which I certainly appreciated. (I also have both the old f/4 lens at work as well as the new f/2.8 lens.)

dpreview is now more a commercial site than a independent blog.
That’s the problem. It’s simply a camera advertising platform of Amazon.
When it’s not a paid advertorial an article has to be made quick without any care.
The photos show what the average consumer would do with this lens. :)

@dpfan32...except that this is not an average consumer lens ;)
@Carey Rose...I remember Dpreview taking all the trouble to advertise, sorry review, a camera in a studio setting, with probably paid models, carefully posed shots with also carefully designed lighting etc.

@dpfan32...You accept then Dpreview is biassed towards a particular brand. Do you also mean that every media brand must be owned by a big corporation? Should we accept any status quo that suits big corporations? How far do you go with this.

seems like SONY knows well how to "advertise" its products :)
that fever affect northup , froknows ... :)

As I mentioned in a later (very lengthy) comment, 75% of images are taken on Canon cameras including the 5D IV, 5DS R, and EOS 80D. Of course you could see all of this yourselves as well. The reason 25% of the images were taken on an a7R III is a combination of wanting a high megapixel body with fast autofocus directly from the image sensor to ensure critical focus. The 5DS R's live view is too slow to focus on moving subjects, and I wanted more resolution in this situation than the 30MP offered by the 5D IV.

As far as 'advertising,' I feel like Sony would probably prefer we use their own-brand 70-200mm F4 in general, and avoid talking about how difficult this lens is to use when adapted to their camera bodies as soon as you move the focus point off-center, which I mention in an earlier comment. But I'm not an advertising expert, so I suppose I can't say for sure.

@wassim no worries at all, I just wanted to clarify as much as possible. I didn't take it personally :)

27" 2560x1440 calibrated IPS. Full screen viewing.

Certainly not as bad as many de-centered lenses are, but, Canon wont/cant fix it either way.

Neither does Canon necessarily need to fix anything. This is most likely caused by using an adapter. They can - and do - cause similar effects because of instead of one contact between the camera and the lens there are now two.

You cannot judge sharpness and bokeh and contrast if you don't take pictures from the same angle at the same time.
And no, 70-300mm G is not as good as this Canon. And it is quite overpriced for what it can do.

And how does that FE 70-300 perform at f/4??

as good as the canon at 300? lol.

What about comparing the FE 70-300 with new Nikon 70-300 AF-P VR that cost $600?

I use Canon and Sony. Nope, the best is still EF 70-300 L (now on A7Riii). It replaced my EF 70-200/4 IS although the new IS II is surely tempting!

Not true, my 8-15mm Fisheye zoom reduces weather effects to such a small size you can ignore them, barring a lightning strike... which would probably look cool... if you survived...
(BTW I was shooting from under an umbrella in a thunderstorm a couple of days ago, was I being sensible in keeping the gear dry or indulging in an extreme sport of waving a metal rod over my head in a lightning storm?)
P.S. did the maths on what was around me and decided I'd be spectacularly unlucky...

Agreed. My copy of the 55-250 STM is amazing for its price at 250mm. It is sharp at 55mm as well. Its weakness is in the mid zoom range, but isn't all that bad. This new lens is full of strong lateral chromatic aberrations, soft corners and lacks punch at 200mm.

I wanted to add that my 70-200 has bad edge sharpness only at 70mm otherwise it is almost on par with my 55-250.
I will never sell the 55-250 STM. When I'm out with a crop body there is absolutely no reason at all to carry the 70-200f4L, the 55-250 STM is the way to go.

And when you ask them if the winters are bad, in Vancouver, they admit it. In Seattle they tell you it's sunny and warm yearround.

Living in Vancouver I would say that Seattle is quite pretty and interesting, but, Vancouver has an insane amount of money, buildings/cars and so looks very different.

Hard to beat the Mountains, bridges, beaches and trees downtown I agree.

Yes the winters suck. +4c and raining everyday for months.

But Seattle Trump's Vancouver!

Great question. On the Metabones adapter I was using, performance was merely so-so. It's not that any shots where the camera locked focus were then out-of-focus when I looked on my monitor, it's just that there was far more hunting, especially if you move the AF point off the center. That said, most of the issues I had were at the telephoto end and in extreme backlight, so I'm sure that doesn't help.

I'll have a quick check of Sigma's MC-11 to see if there's any improvement - there may be, though it only officially supports Sigma-brand glass.

Just confirmed, I'm seeing about the same level of hunting on both adapters with this lens. It seems to be far more pronounced with telephoto lenses than wide-angles in our experience, but in any case, once you get more than two 'clicks' away from the center point in Flexible Spot M, the hunting can get pretty bad.

I sold original EF 70-200L/4.0 IS shortly before Sony and Metabones enabled PDAF on adapted lenses and switched to FE 70-200G, otherwise I might keep. However I'd agree with Carey that my previous EF 70-200L/2.8 IS II via adapter (either MB4 or MC-11) simply is not at the same level of EF 16-35L/4.0 IS and EF 24-70L/2.8 II on Sony bodies (these two AF very well), it did hung at 200mm side sometime. Ironically modern Sigma or Tamron EF-mount lenses perform much better via MC-11 on Sony bodies, near native mount level. I have seen Sigma or Tamron 150-600, Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS Sport and Sigma 500/4.0 OS Sport AF-C very well on A9 via MC-11, but not Canon EF lenses. One of reasons I sold EF 500L/4.0 IS.