Incredibly sharp
fast af
Light

non standard filter size
Tripod adapter is extra
Nasty Cheap lens case

I've been taking photos for near 40 years. I've been published in several national periodicals. Until 4 years ago, I only used my F1n, but age requires us to change. I recently had to replace my old series 80-200 f/2.8 "L", and was unsure about which lens to go with. I was told that the Sigma HSM f/2.8 was the best buy. But a friend of mine at B&H said "Rudi" try this new lens. I just wasn't sure about f/4, would it be fast enough? It was "Cheap" in comparison the the f/2.8.

Well I tried it, When it came I was shocked, long,thin and light. No tripod adapter and with the lens hood on it was almost comical. First I found that my tripod mount from my 200mm f/2.8 "L", fit perfectly. Guess what, it's black, but costs 1/2 of the one Canon recommends. Second, a 72-67mm step down ring and a screw on lens hood eliminate the problem of non standard filters. Third, It is one of the sharpest lens I own. For years I've used the 300mm f/2.8 with the flourite element in Africa (fl mount, but I'm afraid I have to move up to an EF, eyes aren't as fast as they once were).

I can tell you, the flourite element is what makes the difference. Great color, contrast and sharpness make this a really fantastic Zoom. If you can only afford one tele lens, make it this tele zoom. Canon has a winner with this lens. I've never anything other than Canon for the last 25 years, and this quality of lens is why

Similar Products Used:

80-200 f/2.8 L (old series)

This sharp, light, well-built zoom, balances beautifully with my EOS3 and Elan IIe bodies. I paid the extra $$$ for the tripod collar (grrrrr, Canon), and find it makes tripod and macro work much easier. Eyeshine is eliminated by using the Really Right Stuff flash bracket with the tripod collar. With a step-up ring, 72mm filters will fit under the lenshood, as will the 500D closeup diopter.

Tripod collar should be included
Oddball filter size (remedied by use of 67-72 stepup)
Included lens "case" is shoddy for an L lens

For amateurs who can get by without maximum aperture of f/2.8, (and the accompanying barbell-like weight), this is the Canon zoom to get. Much better sharpness and build quality than the "consumer" zooms, without "zoom creep" of the EF 70-210mm.

Customer Service

None required

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF 70-210mm USM
Canon EF 70-300mm USM

Lightweight
USM + FTM
Excellent optics

See below

I ran some test shots of this lens at 200mm, 135mm, and 100mm to compare with my other lenses (24/2.8, 50/1.4, 100/2.8 macro USM). The optical quality of this lens is superb, even wide open. The 100mm USM Macro outperforms it at 100mm, but as a prime lens that costs as much as the zoom, that isn't surprising. Stopped down to f/8, I can hardly tell a difference.

Performance at 200mm seems to be slightly softer near the edges when wide open, but still very impressive. I also noticed some *very* slight vignetting when wide open at 200mm, likely not noticeable in the field; certainly this lens has the least wide-open vignetting of the four I tested.

The build is impressively light, yet solid. It seems well-balanced enough that it doesn't seem necessary to use the tripod collar, provided you have an adequate ball head. Ring USM functions just as advertised, which is to say incredibly fast, silent, and with full-time manual.

It's a superb optic, by any standard...to me, the cost and weight are great bonuses. I can't make a first-hand comparison with the 70-200/2.8, but I really haven't missed that extra stop so far. This lens is a fantastic deal.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

EF 24mm f/2.8
EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX Macro

Very Sharp
Excellent Contrast
Very light for an "L" lens
Great portrait, travel and close-up lens.

The lens is a bit longer than needs to be
I would have liked it to be a bit shorter in
length, specially for a lens of that short
a focal length range.

Optically, this lens is magnificent. This is as good as it gets in this focal length range; by
any lens manufacturer; period. And what makes it even better is its price.

The only weakness I've stated, having to do with its length, is a very personal beef that I have and it has to do with my preference of using small waist level camera bags when I travel and this lens makes it hard to use this style bag. Others may not have a problem with this. But this is a very minimal beef since the benefit, of course, is that due to it's longer length, there is no rotation or extension when focusing. This is a great benefit!

I highly recommend this lens for anyone interested in very high quality images of objects
that are relatively near by and to isolate portions of landscapes. But, not if your'e looking
to shoot wildlife or birds that are more than 20-40 feet away from the lens. The 1.4 magnifier is OK, but there is always some quality loss. If wildlife is your goal, then spend more money on a lens with a
longer focal length.

On the other hand, I have gotten excellent results when using this lens and a close-up lens for macro/close-up work. I've worked with true macro lenses and really, unless you are anal about it, the
image quality is comparable between this lens(with close-up lens) and a macro.

Again, highly recommended for portraiture, travel, close zooming/landscape-isolation and close-up work. For these applications, it doesn't get any better!

Cheers!

Customer Service

All my experiences with Canon people
have been outstanding!

Similar Products Used:

Canon 28-70 2.8L

Great sharpness, very fast and quiet focusing, light.

None for the price

It was my first medium tele zoom and I was astounded by the contrast and sharpness. I used to prefer prime lenses in the 100m range because of the supposedly quality over zooms. The 70-200L f4 changed my opinion completely. As far as I can tell, only the Contax Sonnar 100mm f2.8 and the Canon 85mm f1.8 produced similar quality photos.
A highly recommended lens.

Similar Products Used:

MicroNikkor 105, Minolta Macro 100, Canon EOS 85mm f1.8 USM, Contax Zeiss Sonnar 100mm, Leica R 135mm, Nikkor 135mm.

Lightness!!
L quality
Cheaper than 2.8
Must I say TACK Sharp again? :)

None

This lens is the BEST lens to get! f2.8 is almost double the cost and the weight! I could hold longer compared to f2.8 monster. Manual focusing is a delight too, its smooth. The quality of this lens can be seen inside the viewfinder, things looked bright and crisp.

Customer Service

not needed so far.

Similar Products Used:

75-300II, 70-200f/2.8,

Price, weight, sharpness, the look ('white lens'!!)

f4 (not a weaknesses considering the price and weight) Can't use it indoors.

The lens produced tack sharp pictures. Optically it's very strong!! I (and my girlfriend) started to like it when we see the first pictures from this lens. After that, it seems I am using it 95% of the time I take pictures.
I am suspicious whether the f2.8 counterpart would produce nicer background blur because of the wider aperture.
Anyway, 10 stars!!!

Customer Service

Never used

Similar Products Used:

85 f1.8
24-85 f3.5-4.5
20-35 f3.5-4.5
50 f1.8 II

Light weight, tack sharp and handles flare well for a zoom.
It is very light and compact.

Looks a bit silly with the oversized lens hood and, although
cheaper than the 2.8L,it's pricey for the range even with the current rebate.

Canon 70-200 F4L
I have taught photography for 25 years and used EOS since l992. Just bought the 70-200 F4 L after testing one directly against my 100-300 USM. With a Canon 1.4X (i.e.98-280) it was far superior to the 100-300 at every aperture and focal length. With a 2X Canon converter compared to an off-brand converer on the 100-300, the comparison at 400 made the 100-300 look like a Coke Bottle lens. Incidentally, the 70-200L will autofocus reliably with a Kenko 2X converter and the results are sharpness is quite close to the those with the Canon 2X. The tripod collar from my 300F4 L fits and another reviewer indicated that the black collar from the 200 F2.8 L also fits. To the reviewer who said you can't use the VG-10 grip for vertical shots on an A2E/EOS 5,just reverse the collar and everything clears. For close-ups I use a Nikon 6T with a 67-62 stepping ring and the results are very good.

Customer Service

I am only 40 minutes from Canon USA and they provide great service.

Similar Products Used:

This is my first L series zoom. I have the fixed 300 F4 L.

Optical quality
Build quality
Focusing speed and lack of noise

Cheap and nasty lens hood and bag
Tripod ring an optional extra ($140)
67mm filter size!

Over the last few months I have taken over 1,500 shots with this lens on an EOS 5 and EOS 3. Mostly motorsport (bike-racing at Knockhill) and photos of the Scottish Claymores (NFL Europe football team) Cheerleaders for our web-site - www.claymorescheerleaders.co.uk

Out of those photos the majority have been perfectly focused, especially with the area focus on the EOS 3 and any that haven't have been my fault and not the camera's!

For web use the lens is total overkill quality wise, but for printing the quality is perfect. Since I couldn't afford the f2.8 lens I am having to use 200ASA slide film instead of 100 but the results are so sharp I can print 8"x10" and they are still crisp and clear.

One big difference over my old (1986!) 70-210mm f4 lens is the lack of vignetting around the edges at maximum zoom. The frame is even and bright at all focal lengths. The focusing speed and lack of noise is the other great improvement, why did I wait so long to upgrade!

At first I was going to buy the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 but I was not impressed with the build quality. I tried a few and found them all to be very stiff and inconsistent when zooming. When I decided to try the similar-priced f4 Canon I could not believe how much smoother everything felt. Maybe next year I will trade it in for the f2.8 Canon - the weight doesn't bother me but I'd like that extra stop to be able to use faster film.

I have just taken a bunch of shots with the 1.4x converter which I got free as part of a Canon promotion with the EOS 3 and it seemed to be fine. Once I get the film back I shall post a review on the 1.4x converter page - might as well since no one else has reviewed it yet :-)

I was annoyed that the tripod ring was an extra $140, Canon must think that anything painted white should be expensive! The lens isn't so heavy that you can't mount the camera body on a tripod but for portrait-format shooting on a monopod you need the tripod ring. Unlike Darryl Isherwood (review 3/14/01) I had no problems with the tripod ring with my EOS 5 (A2E) in vertical mode with the VG10 grip. While I'm complaining I'll also say that I think the lens hood and case are pathetic for a lens of this price. Compare them against the ones that Sigma provide with their lens - much better! And the 67mm filter size is also a pain.

These complaints count for very little though. The lens itself is excellent and anyone who is in the market for a lens at this price would be most satisfied with it.

Overall, great lens - maximum points!

Customer Service

Not impressed! First time I've ever had a problem with Canon gear in almost 20 years of use. Focus mechanism was catching on zoom mechanism so I had it serviced (under g'tee) by official UK service agent. Lens came back in three weeks fixed but with dust on inner elements. Jessops were very good and gave me a replacement lens but it makes me wary of ever having to send anything off again. Anyone else had any similar problems?

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-210mm f4 (the old push-pull, non-USM zoom)
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 HSM

The closest to "perfect" optics I´ve used:
Super sharp & with super-clean and saturated colours!
Low weight
Hood included, felt-covered inside (a useful one as opposed to claims made by others here who simply say it´s "cheap".The cost of the hood is irrelevant if it works, which this one does!At 70mm, that is)
Very well finished, including control buttons for AF on/off & focus limiter
Sealed rear element prevents dust to reach inside when changing lenses
Inside of barrel rear of rear element is felt-covered to prevent reflections
Superbly designed zoom & focus rings, with both good grip and just the right "feel" when zooming, and when focusing manually
Image quality make me totally sure about zooms not under-performing primes anymore!(see "Bottom line")
Well balanced on my EOS 600 (630 in USA...)
Precise and fast focusing, maybe faster on newer/better EOS bodies.
Low weight make it possible to use it without the (horribly costly) tripod mount...
Looks good in it´s white colour

A little too big physically for the range and weight
Should be delivered with tripod mount anyway...
A better case could also be handy, but nothing I seriosly complain about as I put it in the bigger bag anyway
Too expensive (in Sweden Sigma EX 100-300/4 EX & Sigma 70-200/2,8 EX cost equal or less...) but that may be solely a swedish problem...
It´s not white really...did I say it was white...?
It´s more like very, very light grey, still stands out too much sometimes...(but, who cares..?)

The only thing notably worse on this lens than on most primes is that there is visible although small distorsion, especially at the long end.Not big, but may be even better on most primes in the range.
In back-light it´s been good so far, but I haven´t shot more than the casual few images back-lighted, so I shouldn´t state that it is "perfect" in such conditions.Few prime lenses are, by the way...
Otherwise as performance goes it has made me, if not speechless, a happy owner!
I can´t over-emphasize its sharpness and colour reproduction, images just look "live"!
None of the mentioned "owned & tried" lenses made it better, but the 180 & 100 Nikon lenses, I must say, do equal this Canon. I think the 200 Pentax does too.
(In back-light the Nikon Series E 100mm is not up to the 180 Nikkor & this L lens, though, lacking multi coating)
When shooting colour-negative film, I´ve started to solely go for the "Konica Centuria 400", new version, which show both very good colour balance/saturation, AND is very sharp and fine grained.It outperformed the couple of "Fuji Superia 400 Extra" I tried parallell with it when travelling this summer, and did show this L lens to its best.I also used the lens with Fuji Sensia 100, Elite Chrome Extra Color 100, Kodak Tri-X & Konica Monochrome 400.All to full satisfaction, beeing the films I use to shoot with, therefore letting me rest assured about my findings on this lens.

(Strictly technically Fuji Provia 100F and similar print-films might show it to be even better, but the films mentioned before are so sharp that I hesitate to state that any significant bettering of performance should be easily visible, other than on very large prints)

In fact, beeing used to shoot ISO 200 in print film, the discovery of the Centuria 400 to be such a goodie, made me more sure about my choice of this 70-200/4.I had it on the short list aside with the Sigma EX 100-300/4 & Sigma EX 70-200/2,8.Two very good lenses, but based on my earlier use of a few 2,8 lenses in this range I wanted something lighter to carry.
Now, I´m firmly safe to state that except for when you need to shoot in really weak light this is a splendid lens!
Not shooting Canon EOS? Pity You...

Value rating based on price in Sweden, overall rating based solely on performance regardless of price.So, when I´m lowering the average rating here CanonSweden & swedish economics are to blame...
...have to try the 800 films next...

Customer Service

???
Well, my sample (recently bought) has two-three dust particles nesting inside, something I couldn´t wait to fix as travel had to be done shortly after purchase.Will be swiftly fixed as soon as I send it in.Canon Sweden has a very good reputation for fast and competent repairs, at least on the "better" equipment they´re marketing.

Similar Products Used:

Owned:
AF Nikkor 80-20/2,8 (old version)
Tokina AF ATX 80-200/2,8 (old version)
Sigma AF 70-210/4-5,6 APO
Pentax 200/2,8*
Nikon 100mm/2,8 Series E
Tried:
AF Nikkor 180/2,8
Canon EF 100-300 (non "L" version)