Canon EF 70-200mm f4.0L USM?? Worth the money?

Chilt

Chilt

Suspended / Banned
Messages
738
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
Got some spare cash, and im liking the look of the 70-200m, But is it really worth the £515 price tag it has? Is it that £300 better than the 55-250mm Canon?

Or what else would you guys suggest i get for a good lens in this price range?

Thanks

Nick
 
70-200 is a well regarded lens, keep your eye in the classified usually 350-400
 
If you keep an eye on mpbphotographic you pick up for £400, i bought one last week and it really is a cracking lens, i have the 55-250 and it really is a step up from that the autofocus is really quick, the bokeh is amazing and its really sharp.
 
Ive seen one in here for 370 posted, but its a 2006 version, Not sure if i should get a newer one?

Nick
 
I see from your kit you already own the 55-250, if you got the 70-200 would you be getting rid of the 55-250?
You will loose 15mm on the wide end and 50mm on the long end, and IS
 
Many say the 70-200's are the best lenses Canon makes, but is it worth the higher price tag? If you're after ultra quick focussing, or bitingly sharp optics, or beautifully rendered out of focus objects, then yes.

Maybe see if you can try one out, or borrow one for a few hours to see if it's for you first?

Mark.
 
RKC said:
I see from your kit you already own the 55-250, if you got the 70-200 would you be getting rid of the 55-250?
You will loose 15mm on the wide end and 50mm on the long end, and IS
Click to expand...

Yeah i would sell that for like £120 or so on here, So that would go towards the price, I know id lose some zooming qualities, but it must me ALOT better. The fact its massive and more expencive?

Thanks

Nick
 
Chilt said:
Yeah i would sell that for like £120 or so on here, So that would go towards the price, I know id lose some zooming qualities, but it must me ALOT better. The fact its massive and more expencive?

Thanks

Nick
Click to expand...


I doubt you would be dissapointed I have one and love it, I have never tried 55-250 but a lot of people seem very pleaed with it bang for bucks hard to beat.
 
Do you guys use the IS version or does the non-IS come just as
highly recommended?
 
My F4 L is second only to my 100mm L IS macro lens for sharpness and colour rendition. I don't use it much, but it is a lovely lens...
 
Only you can decide on the worth of the lens to you. Undoubtedly it is a step up from the 55-250 in image quality and speed of focusing. Personally I have just sold my 55-250 for £110 and bought a 70-200 f4 L for £385 and I consider it to be a really worthwhile change. I now need to cover the wider side of things with a 17-40 L - more saving to be done.
 
I used to have a 70-200 f4 and I adored it. Tack sharp, fast focus, great contrast and dreamy bokeh.
Desire for more reach was the only thing that forced my hand to sell it.
 
Thanks for all the comments peeps, this lens seems to be loved my many, But one thing i need to ask is.. What the heck is bokeh? Haha im quite new to photography :P

Thanks

Nick
 
Chilt said:
What the heck is bokeh
Click to expand...

Just don't ask how to pronounce it :thinking: I've yet come across a universally accepted way of saying it! I've heard it like "bocker", "bo-" as in 'bow' and "-keh" as in the start of the name 'Ken'...
 
Correct pronunciation is normally accepted to be bowkay as in bow and arrow and the letter K
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top