Wake 101
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Video and Photography

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-14-2007, 12:15 PM Reply   
Does anyone have this lens?

I have a Digital Rebel XT and am looking for a quality lens in this price range.


Kelly (Weskel)
Old     (Walt)      Join Date: Jan 2003       05-14-2007, 12:18 PM Reply   
Take a look at the Canon 70-200L f/4
Old     (deuce)      Join Date: Mar 2002       05-14-2007, 12:21 PM Reply   
Here are numerous reviews of that lens.

....also many on another zoom that is in the same price range(100MM less range and no IS) and gets rave reviews.
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-14-2007, 12:40 PM Reply   
Thanks for the fast replies,

My Sons play soccer and I have noticed with the stock lens (I believe it is 18-55mm) I cannot zoom in far enough to get any good shots from the sideline.

Would the 70-200L Cannon provide enough zoom to get up close on the kids.

Also we take it on the boat with us and even at 55mm you really cant get close enough, I crop my pictures and they are pretty good but I just want more!!

I would like to have really sharp pictures when fully zoomed in and think on a boat you would need a real fast autofocus.

This is my first "good" camera so I don't have to much knowledge on what is needed and what is good quality equipment.

Old     (bamacpa)      Join Date: Aug 2006       05-14-2007, 12:49 PM Reply   
I just purchased the XTi and we had the 70-300mm lense we bought for our older EOS 35mm camera. I haven't tried it on the XTi yet, but am expecting good things from it. It took great pictures with the 35mm camera. I would say this would be the most used lense we have. You'll be glad you went ahead with the 300mm lense IMO.
Old     (Walt)      Join Date: Jan 2003       05-14-2007, 12:54 PM Reply   
The 70-200 are the way to go for action shots IMHO.

Here's a example.
Old     (deuce)      Join Date: Mar 2002       05-14-2007, 1:01 PM Reply   
You should be fine with the 200MM and reach. I shoot my sons hockey with the 70-200 2.8 and have no reach issues.
Old     (swami)      Join Date: Apr 2006       05-14-2007, 1:10 PM Reply   
I have reach issues with my 70-200 when shooting cable. (on the other side of the lake) but from boat, from chase boat, no problems.. and some reach issues when shooting boat from shore.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       05-14-2007, 6:21 PM Reply   
That new 70-300 has very good IQ but is slow on the long end. AF is reasonably fast, IS is latest generation and is really good. I just wasn't happy with the build quality and the fact that it doesn't do well with TC's. You're not going to get images that pop like you will with the 70-200.
Old     (clubmyke)      Join Date: Aug 2004       05-15-2007, 7:51 AM Reply   
if you can afford it..a 70-200 2,8 with a 1.4 teleconverter...
Old     (caskimmer)      Join Date: Apr 2006       05-15-2007, 8:14 AM Reply   
Unless you anticipate using your camera extensively indoors the 2.8 is overkill and not needed by the vast majority of photographers (even those who think they need it). The f4 is smaller and lighter (very helpful on a boat), has an excellent build quality with an image quality as good as the 2.8. Just because the F2.8 has "better specs" and costs more doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job.

Is carrying the extra weight (which you WILL notice), bigger bag, and $700 price difference worth a couple shots that you might not of gotten with a F4 lens. IMO the recent advancements in noise reduction make this lens irrelevant to all but a select few photographers.

BTW- I've been a professional photographer since 1988 and I've only needed that extra stop but a handful of times. I can say with confidence that I wouldn't have gotten my money's worth by buying the more expensive lens.
Old     (awl)      Join Date: Feb 2006       05-15-2007, 8:30 AM Reply   

Are most of your shots outdoors? We mostly shoot outdoors since this is where most of our time is spent. However, when I shoot my boys during basketball or other school functions I'm constantly at 2.8. During basketball I could use a few more stops if I had them. This maybe operator error. I am admit that I am a newby!
Old     (caskimmer)      Join Date: Apr 2006       05-15-2007, 9:10 AM Reply   
yea, I primarily shoot outdoors but also do lots of night stuff and have shot over 20 weddings without incident.

Fast moving indoor action (or night football games) and dark church weddings are legitimate needs for fast glass but even then it can be a catch 22. When your aperture is at 2.8 the depth of field is incredibly small at the larger focal lengths and when combined with low light it is often more then the camera's AF is capable of making it relatively easy for your subject to step out of focus.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       05-15-2007, 9:54 AM Reply   
There's not much to add to what Seans' said above. Don't buy the 70-200 f2.8 L IS though because you think you're getting slightly better IQ. It's become widely accepted that the new 70-200f4 L IS is now the best of the bunch in fact many are saying it's the best zoom on the planet from an IQ standpoint.
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-15-2007, 12:54 PM Reply   
I was doing some looking around and was wondering if I really need a $600.00 lens, considering I don't know anything about photography...

Heres what I am looking at: 0&SummaryType=ALL&Pagesize=100


I would say about 90 percent of my pictures will be "action" shots.

Is it important to have the image stabilization if shooting from a moving boat or would you prefer the 70-200 f/4?

What does the f/4L mean?

My neighbor just purchased this lens:

Is it a "cheap" lens not worth looking at?

Thanks again

Old     (bigdad)      Join Date: Apr 2002       05-15-2007, 1:17 PM Reply   
f = f stop.
4 = the lowest aperature (or opening for light)for the lens
L = Canon's professional lens series. They are the lenses that are white or have a red stripe on them. More ruggedly built and have better optics in them.

You might want to study to learn what these numbers mean. With photography there are so many combinations of f stops, shutter speeds, ISO settings, exposure compensations to get that ultimate shot that it could take a long time to figure it out. I assume every pro generally shoots in manual to control every setting. Do you shoot in the Program mode? It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it basically turns your DSLR into a point and shoot camera. You will get a decent picture but it is better to tweak the settings to get the best picture possible.

Any photographer will tell you it is the lens that makes the difference and not the body (to a certain extent). The Canon F/4L will take incredible outside daylight shots. Bring it indoors and it will struggle without good lighting or a off camera flash.

As for the second lens you mention. Not familiar with that particular lens, but you get what you pay for. Bargains can be found for under a grand but don't expect to get results like Walt with that particular lens.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       05-15-2007, 7:24 PM Reply   
I'd take a Tamron over the old canon 75-300's but some people like them.

For that price it won't kill you if you find you want something better later. At least you'll have a better idea of what you need at a later point.
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-17-2007, 12:24 PM Reply   
I just ordered the Canon 70-200 f4/L, Looks like a great lens...

I ordered it overnight, so I will get it before we go out Saturday...

I will post some pictures this weekend, I am just learning how to wakeboard so you may get some pics that are not that exciting, (or worse yet, tubing/kneeboarding)!!

Old     (deuce)      Join Date: Mar 2002       05-17-2007, 12:49 PM Reply   
Good choice, I am sure you will be very happy with it.

I look forward to the pics!
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-18-2007, 8:55 AM Reply   
I ordered the lens yesterday from at a cost of $589.99, then I went to looking for the same lens to see if I could have gotten it any cheaper, (I know I did it in the wrong order), but pricewatch showed me that Newegg was selling the lens with a $50.00 off instant savings.

I just got off the the phone with Newegg's customer service and the credited my account $50.00, so I purchased the 70-200 f/4L USM for $539.99!!!

I love Neweggs customer service.

Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       05-18-2007, 10:01 AM Reply   
Is that the Canon instant rebate? If not you should be eligible for another $50 off. Canon just started their spring rebates yesterday.
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-18-2007, 10:09 AM Reply   
Looks like that is what it was from.

Thanks for the info.

Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       05-18-2007, 10:54 AM Reply   
Good timing on your part either way, one day earlier and you'd be $50 poorer! Enjoy the 70-200, it's a good choice!
Old     (weskel)      Join Date: Jan 2007       05-18-2007, 10:57 AM Reply   
Sometimes dumb luck works out....

As the old saying goes, I would rather be lucky than good anyday!


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 2:12 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home


© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us