Ripley Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I was thinking of getting this lens "Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM" and selling my zoom kit lens which is a Canon 75-300mm 4-5.6 EF that I bought when I got the 350D in mid 2006. I can't afford the IS Canon lenses that are between $900 and $2,500 as we might be going to Scotland later this year and I need to save for that - but I want a better lens to take sharper travel shots. What is meant by the "L" on a lens other than it means it's a good lens?! I already have a 300mm Tokina f4-5.6 lens that is a heavy beast and was on a film SLR we had in the 1990s - it fits my Canon and I took some shots with it while on holidays so I will be able to slot that on the camera if I need the extra 'zoom'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tess32 Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Do you use much of the 200mm - 300mm range on your kit lens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 How many lenses do you want to take with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripley Posted February 6, 2008 Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 Do you use much of the 200mm - 300mm range on your kit lens? tess - when I'm on holiday I do. However, I don't use my DSLR camera much at all unless I'm away somewhere. On our last o/s trip I used the 200 and 300mm lenses for photographing buildings in cities - used it a lot actually to get close ups of famous landmarks but I was fortunate enough to use a bridge to rest my lens on to photograph er, another bridge so the shot wasn't ruined by shake and it was dusk too. I also used it about twice for wildlife shots on a recent local hol. If we go to Scotland this year I'll be taking my new Sigma 17-70 and the Tokina 300mm and hopefully a brand new 200mm lens - plus a polariser and 2 stop ND filter - that's it! I have a Lowerpro backpack that ties around my waist and chest so it't not too heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 The Tokina is a prime? (fixed focal length - you can't zoom it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripley Posted February 6, 2008 Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 (edited) chezzyr - The L series is a fixed length? I didn't know that - I don't know about zooms. The Tokina is a zoom but not very sharp. For travel I will need a zoom. Back to the drawing board! I'll do some research tonight, didn't have time at work today. What I want is a sharp zoom lens 200 to 300mm under $700. I wonder if that's possible. I want better travel photos and now have the better wide angle lens to get them but not the zoom. Sigma make a zoom for under $500 and I really like their 17-70mm wide angle that I have - the difference in photo quality from that lens compared to the canon kit lens is amazing - the colours are more vivid for one thing. Edited February 6, 2008 by Ripley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I think we are getting confused here Ripley: I want to know if your current Tokina (the big beast) can zoom in and out or is it set at 300mm? prime: set at a certain focal length, you cant move it zoom: you can move it in and out (say from 100 to 300 etc) Am trying to establish what focal lengths you have available to play with, with your current lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubiton Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 (edited) For years I've been using a canon 90-300mm lens. Has always done a good job. Cost about $350 at thetime. Costs a little more now but under 700. Currentl have been using a 70-200mm lens and also doe a very very good job (40D seems to like it more than the other lens for some reason but might just be the bigger lens needs cleaning!) L series are the big grey IS type lens that cost about the same or more than the camera. Edited February 6, 2008 by rubiton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripley Posted February 6, 2008 Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 (edited) Ripley: I want to know if your current Tokina (the big beast) can zoom in and out or is it set at 300mm? Yes, it can. It's a 28-300mm (just checked). In fact when you point it down, it slides right out to 300mm as it has no 'lock' on it to stop it. It's AF as well as MF though. OK, I think I've got it. B&H in NY have a description of L lenses that I read tonight. B&H have the L 200m lens for about USD$560 and their warranty is international that is (supposedly) valid by Canon here in Australia. It says it's a 70-200mm telephoto lens: "This high performance telephoto zoom lens EF 70-200MM 1:4 L USM provides excellent performance for all general purposes. The compactness and lightweight make it an excellent travel companion. Features Lens construction: 16 elements in 13 groups Diagonal angle of view: 34°-12° Focus adjustment: USM Closest focusing distance: 1.2m Filter size: 67mm High-performance, L-series telephoto zoom lens combining lightweight and compactness with an f/4 maximum aperture" So if it's a zoom, and as it's an L (what does the L stand for, luxury?) and if I wanted extra zoom to take on a trip, given it's quality I could pack a teleconverter some months on if I buy this just before we go if need be. It's not like I'm going to Africa, but Scotland does have wildlife. Mostly deer, red squirrel, partridge and pheasant that I saw a few metres from me but was too slow or didn't have my DSLR on a hike as it gets tiresome lugging it around - especially if you are 'munro bagging' Edited February 6, 2008 by Ripley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 The 70-200L f4 is a great lens. It's kinda heavy, though. Sigma do an 18-200 OS that's a cracker - might want to look into that one, though it's focal length is a little shorter than your maximum but if you're considering this range, it should be on your list imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubiton Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Grey ones - big and heavy. Black ones lighter made of plastic so not as heavy nor as expensive. (my 70-200 is black not the grey L version). Grey ones big and heavy as I think they actually have glass rather than plastic and therefore produce a higher quality image. But most are not going to truly notice the difference between the consumer black lens and professional grey L lens in pictures of most subjects. However if you have the money and the muscle strength go for the L lens. I plan to buy an L lens soon THEN I'll know the difference properly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripley Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share Posted February 7, 2008 Thanks for you advice, guys. I'll check out the sigma lens too. My old Tokina is a lot heavier than the canon kit lens too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 As you look at lenses with wider apertures, you will find that the lens is heavier (and better usually). Faster glass (2.8 vs 5.6 for example) will be heavier as they let in more light - and that means bigger glass diameter usually. You won't miss faster glass until you don't have it That f4 Canon is a great piece of glass and most people will never really need their 2.8 version. I have two Ls and they are monsters indeed! Oh, and they're white "officially" ;) If you can lay hands on the Sigma, do it - it's a top notch item for a very good price. If you're happy to have it shipped in, check out www.Sigma4Less.com as they often have great prices and the shipping to Aus is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tess32 Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 Sometimes I wish I'd never bought the 100mm macro. It's not officially an L but it might as well be, and it totally ruins you for other lenses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripley Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 I have decided that I'm going to buy this lens. Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM My boss is off to NY in April so I will ask him if he can take a brisk walk to B&H and pick it up for me (he's not staying anywhere near B&H). The USD is now 94 cents so I reckon I should buy it as it's a good several hundred dollars cheaper there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tess32 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I doubt you'll be disappointed :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I have decided that I'm going to buy this lens. Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM My boss is off to NY in April so I will ask him if he can take a brisk walk to B&H and pick it up for me (he's not staying anywhere near B&H). The USD is now 94 cents so I reckon I should buy it as it's a good several hundred dollars cheaper there. Have you checked out Sigma's 70-200 2.8? It's about $300 cheaper (which means you can have it delivered to Australia :rolleyes: ) and it's a total gem. The better aperture is a nice plus. I have a friend shoots weddings, sporting events and music who has this and the Canon 70-200IS 2.8 and he finds himself grabbing the Sigma unless he's shooting in extremely low light. His images are outstanding and he loves the IQ. Says it's a fast focus, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tess32 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I believe Chezzy has/had that lens Ripley, you could ask her :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 (edited) Hi. I think Ripley is going for the non-IS version which is why its so much cheaper. Not sure what the Sigma 70-200/2.8 is going for but yes I have used one and its a lovely lens! Not sure what the weight comparison is, the Sigma is quite solid. The good thing about it is that its NOT white/grey/cream so you won't stick out like a sore thumb (well not as much) :rolleyes: eta: the one I have used is the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM NOT the DG macro version. Edited February 28, 2008 by chezzyr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Ah, I didn't see she was getting the non-IS. Why not have that delivered? It's well within the maximum allowed and BH do a fabulous job of getting things out in good time. Their shipping is very reasonable, imho, and you'll still come out ahead in total cost AND you'll have it two months sooner :rolleyes: I'd probably spend the extra couple of hundred for the 2.8 Sigma (looks like about $799 vs $599), myself, but then again - I love spending other people's money BTW- Sigma4Less has both of these lenses for less than BH and their shipping is usually even better than BHs. I use Sigma4Less a lot and have nothing but positive things to report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now