Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Showing 1-10 of 13
Great images, but let's you down suddenly
6 August 2012
Summary: The lens is photographically great however the built quality / inner design is likely weak and seems to have flaws. I have purchased this lens 4 years ago as downgrade for my f/2.8 IS mark one lens as it's way more portable and I don't shoot indoor sports nor weddings any more. I love the image quality, portability, IS and speed of focusing (non-IS version did not perform as good).
Summary: I purchased this lens after reading many great reviews online. However, I have to say that after testing it during a photo shoot using this lens, a Canon 55-250 & Sigma 17-70 I truly didn't see a significant difference in image quality. As this lens is more expensive than most I decided to return it and use my more inexpensive lenses which I am very pleased with. I love Canon lenses and everyone can't be wrong, so I would suggest trying it for yourself.
Summary: This lens has great image stabilization, build quality and quick auto focus. However I found the sharpness rather unimpressive from 135mm all the way up to 200mm. I did some testing using a tripod, timer and mirror lockup and was disappointed with the results. My copy did not live up to the reviews at all. In fact my plastic 50mm 1.8 was much sharper than this lens. It is possible that I got a bad copy that is not representative of the norm.
Summary: Although I haven't gotten to shoot with this lens yet, and I'm sure it is 5-star, the copy I just received from amazon has large dust particles inside the front element. I will do some shooting to decide if I will return this copy, and will update this review as well.
Summary: I ordered this lens new from an online merchant recently and after taking it out to shoot for one day, I've found that it performs remarkably- when it performs. I am not rating the 70-200 F/4L IS in general, but rather the one that I received. I thought about not writing a review just so that the raving 5star reviews wouldn't be skewed but I thought this might be helpful for people who thought it might be too good to be true that nobody got a lemon.
Summary: Like so many others before,I worried whether I could justify the expensive of buying this lens.I have a 500d,18-55 kit lens,f1.8,Sigma 70-300 and a 55-250IS(which was bought to compensate for the Sigma's lack of performance in low light).I must say that I have been very happy with the 55-250's perfomance but the call of an 'L' lens was attracting me.I reasoned that,if a lens costing under £200 could produce such great results how much better must they be with one costing...
Excerpt: The lens is photographically great however the built quality / inner design is likely weak and seems to have flaws. I have purchased this lens 4 years ago from Adorama as downgrade for my f/2.8 IS mark one lens as it's way more portable and I don't shoot
Summary: Optically speaking this lens is second to none! However even while it is claimed to be of professional quality I have to disagree: It seems that the mechanical parts are not better than any cheap consumer grade lens. I happened to bang this lens against the railing on a ship while turning around. This resulted in a retaining ring inside the lens to break. As a result the lens became totally useless, which was rather annoying since it happened on a holiday trip.
Summary: My copy had a slight focusing issue, but hey... with so many great reviews/copies for this lens there's bound to be one that slips through the cracks. Amazon as usual were fantastic with support and they generated a return coupon for me immediately. I sent it back and was getting a replacement when I changed my mind and now went in for the slightly more expensive Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM Lens instead.