Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Showing 151-160 of 500
Compact 70-200 produces great images
Jack, B&H Photo
22 May 2013
Excerpt: Looking for an image stabalized 70-200, I also wanted a lens that was lighter than my 70-200 2.8 and easier to hand-hold. Ths lens filled both of my requirements. The size makes it perfect to keep in my camera bag and ready for use. It also makes it easy to hand-hold. Of course, the image stabilization adds greatly to this lens.
Pros: Canon L Quality, Consistent Output, Durable, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight, Nice Bokeh, Rugged, Strong Construction
Excerpt: Sharpness is not so good at the corners of the frame and the built quality is not as good as you would expect from an "L" lens, but that's all you can criticize of this zoom. The 70-200/4 L is inexpensive, it has a unique color rendition (which I really love) it's light, compact, and it keeps its size even zooming. Considering its price, it is a very good purchase.
Pros: Bokeh, Color rendition, Good built quality, Small Size
Cons: corners sharpness, not "l" built quality
Excerpt: Great build. Light for its size. Fantastic image quality. As F4, not the greatest in low light, but that's to be expected. Image stabilization is loud, but it works. Expect shorter battery life due to the image stabilization. I also love that there is no physical exterior zoom mechanism; all internal. This means no lens creep and the ability to be a little more inconspicuous.
Pros: Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight, Nice Bokeh
Summary: I researched the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L and Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS and came to the following conclusion: WEIGHT: Hands down, the f/4 was much lighter and smaller in diameter than the f/2.8. It is about the same weight as my previous main zoom, the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM. Yes, I gave up some length going with a 200, but I also purchased the Canon 1.4X teleconverter.
Excerpt: This is the 2nd time I've owned this lens, and I'm as happy as I was last time. This lens is sharp throughout its aperture range, and its IS works very well. With modern, low-noise-at-high-ISO bodies like the 6D, the F2.8 version is merely heavier and physically larger, not better.