Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD vs 70-200mm f/4 IS USM (and 1.4x extender)

S

SomeGuyInNJ

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3
Edit My Images
Yes
I am having trouble deciding between two lenses.

- Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM (and 1.4x extender)

My points to consider

Specs
- Range: The extra 100mm in the 70-300 would certainly be useful. A 1.4x would get the 70-200 most of the way but...
- Aperture: 1.4x would give 70-200 f/5.6 across whole range. But at 200mm with no extender the 70-200 would have a larger max aperture.

Those are two are facts... what I really need help with is the more subjective stuff. Basically... which give better image quality and at what distances and apertures.

Of course a unanimous "the 70-300mm is a crap lens" would negate the need for such discussion :), but I dont think that is going to be the case.

Any thoughts guys?
 
The 70-200 f/4L IS is probably slightly sharper from what I've read and seen in comparisons, but the 70-300 is smaller and lighter for carrying around and has more native range.
I've heard very good things about the 70-300L for image quality, the fact it can be compared to the 70-200 f/4L IS is an indication of how good it's IQ is.

But you haven't told us what you'll be using it for ;)
 
I have just checked out that other post and it does not seem a conclusion was reached comparing the two lenses.

I will be using the lens for wildlife (birds and deer mostly) and landscape photography in the main. It wont be used for many fast moving targets like sports but I wouldnt say my subjects are often completely static either. Light will often be out in the open but also shooting at dusk or in the shade wil not be uncommon (shooting at dawn remains quite uncommon though!)

I'll be using it on a 550d. I have a 17-40mm f/4L so this new lens will be replacing my 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS for shooting anything further away than the 17-40mm reaches :)
 
Last edited:
SomeGuyInNJ said:
I have just checked out that other post and it does not seem a conclusion was reached comparing the two lenses.
Click to expand...

Not yet, they're still trying to come to a decision, same as you!

My thought is that if you're planning to use it primarily with the extender you should go for the 70-300... A simpler light path and the ability to shoot at 70mm without swapping out the TC.
 
Sorry guys, I didnt realize the http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/for...d.php?t=303761 post was from today.

Rushing too much as I had already placed the order for the 70-200mm f/4 before I had done enough research on the 70-300mm to realize it was even a contender, the image quality on the 70-200mm F/4L IS USM seems to be so revered. I was almost hoping the answer on the 70-300mm would be very negative so the decision became a no-brainer.

Both are out of stock on Amazon US (where I was ordering from) at the moment, I have now cancelled the order and will watch the other thread with interest. I dont know if its the same in the UK but on Amazon US the 70-300mm is actually cheaper than the 70-200mm plus the extender.
 
This post on Dan Carr's blog is probably worth a read...
 
I have the 70-300 is and it is a very good lens, my copy is pretty good throught the whole range. A little soft at 300 if i am honest. Pretty well made, but nothing like the build of an L ofc. The IS is fantastic by the way, better than the IS in my 24-105 for sure.

Good luck with whatever you choose
 
The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS is getting good reviews and members here who have bought one love them.
If you want 300mm then go for it.
With a 70-200L f/4 IS and 1.4x extender you will lose one stop.
I've own a 70-200L f/4 IS and it is a cracking lens even with the 1.4x extender, however, if I was looking again and buying new, for the price difference I would go for the 70-300L IS.
 
Last edited:
i have recently purchased the 70-300L, the main reason i chose it over the 70-200 is my need for longer focal length. I find with telephoto zooms i always long for more reach, the difference between aparture isnt very big and its only really on the longer end.

I find the IS amazing and dont think i would buy another telephoto without it now.

The size is another factor, its smaller than i thought it would be and thats a big plus for me.

As for sharpness, well i'm mainly a prime man and i'm normally dissapointed with the performance i get from zooms. I haven't been dissapointed with this lens so far.

If you think you will often need to go further than 200mm then i would choose the 70-300 over the 70-200 + extender.

Now if this was a choice between the 70-300L and the 70-200 2.8 IS II then it would be different because the difference in speed is much greater!

Good Luck with whatever you decide!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top