Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L USM Review

[kevinkyf89]

your presentation skill sucks man! be prepare what you want to say... sounds mumbling man!

[shreader327]

yes its not weather sealed, but what you have to remember is that its not going to make a difference unless you drop it in a body of water or try to be an idiot and take pictures with it in a hurricane or sand storm. and as far as the IS, you really dont need it. just learn how to hold a camera properly. i can see if your taking pictures at very low light in which you should be taking a tripod with you anyways this lense will take pics just as good as the 2.8 IS lense if you know what your doing

[szifon2]

Great lens! I had one of these, but it has been stolen. I still want to re-buy something in this same range.

I got a friend with the 2.8 IS version... well, that is the Rolls Royce

[GiacoxD]

Can I ask you why did you sell it?

[Frace91]

@GiacoxD I didn't use it and wanted the money to buy something else

[waggygee]

nice lens! please stop mumbling... I can hardly hear anything your saying

[BraamKees]

Nice review of a nice lens. I have one question: What about the build quality of this lens? Is it made out of metal or plastic? Just wondering, because some L lenses out there do have a plastic finish instead of metal.

Thanks.

[Frace91]

@BraamKees umm it was metallic (i think, i sold it quite some time ago)

[WFAoFSARNA]

Ja pierdole, co za onanista sprzętowy!

[zumwane]

Have you ever tried the 2.8 one? If yes, anything different other than the aperture?

[Frace91]

@zumwane i haven't tried it unfortunately

i THINK the 2.8 has weather sealing but I'm not sure

i believe to remember that either the 2.8s or the is versions had weathr sealing

according to some tests the 4.0 is supposed to be a tiny bit sharper

[prodigy2k7]

@Frace91 The non-Is versions are older, they do NOT have weather sealing. Both IS versions have weather sealing.

[Frace91]

@prodigy2k7 thanks for the info :)

[zousanai]

nice Review!

[HelloNewYorkCity]

many people don't realize that only the NEWER L SERIES LENSES FROM 1999 TO CURRENT HAVE WEATHER SEALING.

35mm f/1.4l not weather sealed

35-300mm f/3.5-5.6 not weather sealed

70-200mm f/4 f/2.8 non is not weather sealed

[JifferRiffic]

what??? is he speaking broken English..

[minux82]

@bronze5420 Take a look at the specifications for the IS vs non-IS of the f/4. You'll see the non-IS DOES NOT HAVE weather sealing. The 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L and the 400mm f/5.6 L lenses are not sealed either. Make a google search or check the-digital-picture quote: "(the 70-200mm f/4 is not weather sealed)"

[Fonarik777]

Rammstein!!! Yeah!!!

[pyrzequgel]

co za idiota kurwa

[Frace91]

@pyrzequgel thank you :)

[DXm8]

@pyrzequgel haha zrobil facetowi dojazd

[minux82]

Another reason to get the IS version of the f/4 model is because of weather sealing. The non-IS f/4 and f/2.8 do not have weather sealing, the IS-version do.

[Frace91]

thanks for the information :)

[bronze5420]

@minux82 they actually do have weather sealing: all L series lenses do (any canon lens with a red ring)

[prodigy2k7]

@bronze5420 Wrong. Some L lenses are older than when Canon started weather sealing. Some older lenses aren't weather sealed. 70-200mm non-IS versions are not sealed.

[marcmarleyrian]

kapanget mong magreview!

[Knowlidge]

So its better to save for the IS version instead of buying the non IS version now?

[Frace91]

that depends, is only helps if you are shooting static objects handheld at a long exposure (1/focal length sec)

if it doesn't take long and you can afford the is version i'd consider the 2.8 version

[jebidiahtaylor]

@Knowlidge The IS is a great feature, but keep in mind it costs about double the money. If you're shooting outside with adequate light, the f4 version is no problem. A better point like minux82 said is the weather sealing. When it comes down to it though, if you don't have the money you could buy a tripod for $150 and save the other 700 for something else.

[fairbourne]

Thanks for the review. I've been looking for a telephoto lens and have decided on this one. IS would be a nice feature but I'll be using it outside with a fast shutterspeed, so camera shake shouldn't be a problem.

[Snoppgubben]

great video:), thinking highly of me to get this lens, have heard so good about it. I take a lot pictures of sports and other fast stuff, how do you think it works that do not have any IS on it when you take things including sports

[Frace91]

thank you :)

If you want to photograph sports or fast stuff it is generally recommended to use a tripod, onm a tripod the is is useless or even contraproductive.

I sold my 70-200 if i had a spare 1000 euros I'd definately buy the 2.8 version insteead of the is version

also: when you photograph something fast you need fast shutterspeeds where an IS is unnecesarry

[suicidalsameer]

Is this an "IS" Lens?

[Frace91]

no, it's the non is version

[brharte]

Dude, you opened those lens caps like 100 times. LOL.

Good review though.

[Frace91]

Haha, i never realised that :D

thanks :)

[raymandrums]

@brharte lol

[aarontrousselot123]

the tamron 18 to 270mm lense has everthing all in one. I will be able to compare image quallity with both this lense and the tamron soon ill let you know

[Frace91]

that would be awesome, i haven't seen comparisons between that lens and normal telezooms

[acousticwie]

Do you have a candy on your mouth?

[coolinen2007]

he is german thats why

lol

[jonas3154]

what do you think of the Canon 55-250mm IS lens?

[Frace91]

no matter what lens you consider to buy, you will always hear to save a little more to buy a better lens

In it's Price range of 55-200 and 75-300mmbudget lenses it's certainly the best except the 70-300 is usm which is almost 2 times the price

I personally do not like a lens made out of so much plastic but if you can live with that it's certainly a good lens but if it doesn't take too long to save fpr the 70-200 or 75-300 or you can already afford it i would go for one of these

[jonas3154]

Ok thanks! for the reply, i'll look in to that, however i think i'll go for the 55-250mm IS because im doing it just as a hobby and im only a beginner so the other lenses are a bit too expensive for me...(seeing i also need to get a speedlight 430EX II)

[handsomelok]

depands wt you looking for...

cheap lens would not give you good image

but good lens doesn't come cheap ....

so depand which is more important to you

[bionex18]

What, you jealous,or what??

[bionex18]

I have f/2.8

[keviiino]

2.8 is is the dream but to freaking expensive for hobby stuff this is moor than god enough!!

[KevDesign32D]

I am considering to get me one on these L - serial lens in the future . Wie viel hast du fuer diesen lense bezahlt?

[Frace91]

Oops, forgot to answer the whole time

I paid about 500€ back then

But lenses in general got more expensive

[sapporo84]

Nice lens choice, do you miss the IS at all? the IS version is quite pricey.

[Frace91]

Now, in winter when you're not taking a picture of a bird in the sky or so the image can get blurred because it can be pretty dark but in summer I guess it won't be a problem

I'll try to upgrade to the IS version next fall though

[gooza77]

If you're photographing outdoors and the light is good you will not miss IS at all...

[sapporo84]

thats why i like in body IS and not optical IS, lenses become costlier, bulkier.

[wellionvip]

The focsing speed is perfekt

[Frace91]

Thank you,

Unfortunately i can't make a video right now, I'm right in an internship for two weeks and don't have the lens with me

If you want i can make a video when i come back but i can assure, that the lens is not slow ;)

[NathanGrammatico]

Fair Enough, a video would be nice.

[s3rox]

you look very strange ...

[Frace91]

I apologise for that

[MIKEnBC]

Thanks for the video. These videos are very helpful for those doing research.

[Frace91]

thanks, sorry for various grammatical and spelling mistakes ;)

[RAZE1987]

What kind of English is that :S

[Frace91]

bad english by a german :P

[pongscript]

but not bag english for a german...

[pongscript]

by the way, great review.

[Frace91]

thank you :)