Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS or EF 70-200mm f/4L

[Justin_AUS_Spotter]

I'm having the hardest time trying to decide so. I've been debating for months I thought I could figure it out on my own I but I can't. Regardless of zoom which lens is better? I know that the 200mm lens has supposedly a better build, but it doesn't have IS. While at the same time the 300mm lens is rumored to have poor construction and slow AF.

I'm stuck please someone help me get a definitive answer

[Will M]

Hi Justin.

Go HERE and roll your mouse over to see the differences , you can also change aperture and focal length. this should help u choose the best lens for your needs.

[Justin_AUS_Spotter]

Hi Justin.

Go HERE and roll your mouse over to see the differences , you can also change aperture and focal length. this should help u choose the best lens for your needs.

Thanks I've already checked sites like these but I need more of a used it been there done that opinion/ suggestion instead of just stats. They both have their pros and cons.

[Will M]

Read a review site ??

www.fredmiranda.com is good , I've owned the 70-300 IS and the 70-200 2.8L IS and they're both good lenses , 70-300IS is fine if you're just starting out , I didn't find it too slow and some of my mates still use this lens for spotting as it's lightweight and versatile.
All taken with the 70-300 IS by myself:

[photoid=5937815]
[photoid=5741242]
[photoid=5726618]
[photoid=5726018]
[photoid=5726025]
[photoid=5714373]
[photoid=5710058]

[tinymoon]

Pls read this following theard http://forums.jetphotos.net/showthre...9&page=1&pp=20

Depend on how far from you from subject. Do you really need extra 100mm to cover your shot? OR 200mm can make it all good.

For an extra 100mm go for 70-300 (owned before and satisfied with the result except a little noise and vibration when taking focus)

For quality and build go for 70-200 (f4 or 2.8 IS or without IS) Mine is f4 IS

Best advice is to go directly to the shop, pick up two, test and check.

[Will M]

The 70-200 F/4 L IS rates better than the 70-200 2.8 L IS doesn't it Tran ?

HERE the f/4 L IS looks much sharper !

[tinymoon]

The 70-200 F/4 L IS rates better than the 70-200 2.8 L IS doesn't it Tran ?

HERE the f/4 L IS looks much sharper !

Except for large print version you can clearly see the difference between f4IS and f2.8 IS. I had the chance to test both f2.8 IS and f4 IS and decided to get f4 IS due to its sharpness and lightweight. The IS work much better (to my though it should be new version of IS as well on f4 IS cause f2.8 IS is an old lens) The next thing is f2.8 IS much expensive than f4 IS and i seldom to use such large fstop. On my copy f4 IS fstop range from f4 up to f11 deliver the same result not much different. For f2.8 IS at f2.8 and f4 the result is not comparable to f4 IS at f4

To me the from 9.5 to 9.8 rate is nothing

[adam642]

I used to have a 70-300 IS, and I traded it in for a 70-200 f/4.

The 70-200 f/4L has top-notch image quality. It's as sharp as any zoom lens Canon makes, except possibly the 70-200 f/4 IS. The build quality is excellent, and the front element doesn't move when you zoom or rotate...this is very necessary if you want to use a circular polarizer. And it comes with a nice hood.

The 70-300 is a great plane-spotting lens, but it isn't as useful as a general-purpose lens. It zooms to 300mm (without a teleconverter), and the IS can be useful for keeping a fast-moving plane in the frame. But the image quality, while excellent for a non-L lens doesn't quite match up, the front element rotates on focus, the focus isn't as fast, and the barrel of the lens gets significantly longer when you zoom in. Also, you have to stop down to get good sharpness; the maximum aperture is f/5.6 at 300mm, but you'll get much better pictures at f/8. The 70-200 is usable wide-open.

If you're looking specifically for a plane-spotting lens, and need the extra reach, get the 70-300 IS. If you're looking for a more general-purpose lens, get the 70-200 f/4. If you can afford another $200 or so, get a 1.4x teleconverter to use with the 70-200 f/4; that will turn it into a 98-280mm f/5.6 lens without affecting the image quality too much.

Hope this helps...

[dheald]

The 70-200mm f/4L will provide a sharper image than the 70-300mm most of the time, due to the fact that a shorter range in focal lengths in a lens results in better image quality, period.

If your vantage point would be within the 200mm range, then the 70-200mm f/4L is your choice. If you need more reach, most of the time, then the 70-300mm would be your choice. Or, if you want to have the best of both lenses, lean towards the 70-300mm. If you want more, go with the more popular 100-400mm L lens. That lens will cover most of your needs. If you're not needing less than 100mm most of the time, and want more than 200mm, I would recommend the 100-400mm lens. That is generally the lens of choice for a reason - it covers just about all ranges.

Dean