Disappointed in my new L series lens! ;)

[grandpawrichard]

My new Canon 70 to 200 f4 L seies telephoto lens came today.  I got it out of the box and onto my camera as fast as humanly possible, then I ran outside a began to take photos of some flowers!

I guess I am a little disappointed in the lens. :eek: It focuses much closer than my non L series 90 to 300 lens. It is much quieter than the kit lens. It is also a sharper focus lens. My main complaint is that it is much heavier than my kit lens and it is also better looking than the kit lens!

I took this photo today:



the settings were: Camera Make:
Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2008:07:16 12:17:24
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 200.0mm
CCD Width: 3.42mm
Exposure Time: 0.0031 s (1/320)
Aperture: f/14.0
ISO equiv: 400
White Balance: Auto
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)


Here is a photo that I took of the same flowers that I took the other day with my 90 to 300 mm. kit lens (much later in the day and no direct sunlight):



Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2008:07:14 19:05:08
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 300.0mm
CCD Width: 3.42mm
Exposure Time: 0.0050 s (1/200)
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO equiv: 800
White Balance: Auto
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)

Now, get a load of this photo taken with the kit lens:



Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2008:07:14 19:01:48
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 300.0mm
CCD Width: 3.74mm
Exposure Time: 0.0050 s (1/200)
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO equiv: 400
White Balance: Auto
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)

With the L series:



Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2008:07:16 12:11:38
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 188.0mm
CCD Width: 3.42mm
Exposure Time: 0.0040 s (1/250)
Aperture: f/14.0
ISO equiv: 400
White Balance: Auto
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)

Here's a photo of a rose bud that I really like:


Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2008:07:16 12:04:59
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 200.0mm
CCD Width: 4.30mm
Exposure Time: 0.010 s (1/100)
Aperture: f/18.0
ISO equiv: 100
White Balance: Auto
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)

and another view:



Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2008:07:16 12:06:56
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 113.0mm
CCD Width: 5.13mm
Exposure Time: 0.0050 s (1/200)
Aperture: f/14.0
ISO equiv: 200
White Balance: Auto
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)

I guess that I should admit that I LOVE the new Canon 70-300 f/4 L series lens that I just purchased! It is The Nicest lens that I have ever put on this camera! Now I just need to save up for some more L Series lenses!

Dick

[Skyvalhunter]

yea better take it back those pictures are horrible!!!

[popeshawnpaul]

Ut oh, you got an L addiction.  I've owned tons of L series lenses and love them all.  Did you get the IS version of this lens or the non-IS version?

I must say, I just got the 100mm f2.8 macro a few weeks ago and it's as sharp as any L series lens I've ever had.  In addition, a while ago I bought a 10-22mm EF-S lens and it's as sharp as any L series lens I've ever used.  They are really starting to make a few quality lenses without L designation.  I can say I've used a few L series lenses that weren't that great of quality.  (100-300mm L, 20-35 L...yuk)

[yajsab]

> I guess that I should admit that I LOVE the new Canon 70-300 f/4 L series lens that I just purchased!

You mean 70-200.

Did you get the IS version?  I bought this lens (non IS) a few months back, and I realized how old I've grown.     I can't hand held @ 200.  I kept thinking of the IS version now.  May be I'll just keep this one and save up to buy an IS in longer range.  I went to Yellowstone three weeks ago and noticed that for wild life shooting I need longer range. 

Those are horrible pictures.

Glad you like the lens.

[grandpawrichard]

Shawn and yajsab ,
I didn't get the IS version due to the weight of the lens and the price. I figured that this model would be an awesome walk around lens, especially when out hunting.

Shawn,
I have you to blame for the purchase! If I had never seen your photos I would have been happy with my kit lenses! 

yajsab,
you are absolutely right about the lens size! I screwed up and put a 300 instead of a 200.  I guess I'm just too excited about the lens and the results. 

I'm pretty lucky so far, I can still hand hold a 200, but I also have a pretty nice tripod that I can take along with me.

Skyvalhunter,
Yup! You are definitely right! I better take it back and get a 2X converter in the L series to go along with it! Maybe even pick up an L series 28 to 70 to go with it!

Dick

[popeshawnpaul]

I gotta say guys, I was against IS for a long time but I'm sold.  I noticed you shot a lot of the above shots at 1/200th of a second and that's the bare minimum shutter speed you can use with this lens.  However, with IS you could shoot this thing easily down to 1/60th...  The IS is so expensive, however.  The 70-200 f4 IS L is about 1k...quite a bit more than the $500 you probably paid for the non-IS.  I still get hung up on it being f4...

I recently rented the 400mm f4 DO IS and used IS the whole time on it.  I handheld sharp pictures down to 1/60th.  Simply amazing.  I never used a tripod.  I am of the opinion that I don't want to use a tripod anymore for wildlife.  It's necessary for landscape, but with IS wildlife shots can be done without a tripod. 

Yaj...when I go to Yellowstone my favorite lens is a 400mm.  It's the perfect all around focal length, especially with a crop sensor.  At Yellowstone you can get away with a 300mm.  Great pics guys.

[Slider]

WOW those Pics suck..................lol 

[popeshawnpaul]

I know I posted this on here before, but I thought I would post it again for those who may have missed it.  If you are wondering what the hubbub is about an L or Luxury series Canon lens then here is the difference.  The first lens is a 28-105 EF f3.5-f4.5 non-L series lens.  All the settings are the same between the two shots.  They are both shot at 40mm.  Here is the difference.  By the way, the first lens, the 28-105 is a decent lens and better than cheap kit lenses...  Do you see a difference?  I have taken very nice shots with both lenses, but I do notice the clarity on images with the non-L lenses is a bit fuzzy and not sharp like an L series lens.  So sometimes they are a few extra bucks, but is it worth it to you?  Only you can decide.  I'll add that there are some cheap L series lenses and some non-L lenses are more expensive than L lenses.  So it's not a rich mans game. 

Canon 28-105 f3.5-f4.5:


Canon 17-40 F4 L

[Jerome]

Wow thats like night and day.  Impressive difference.

[Gamblin Guy]

Dick,

Nice to see you jumping in to the "other" form of shooting and congrats on the L glass.  I bought the 100-400 this spring and finally got a chance to really play with it during my boys allstar baseball tourney earlier this month.  I shot both hand held and with a monopod and really liked the mono.  Might be an option for you to help with the weight.

Dan

[boneaddict]

I've got lens evny.   congrats on the new toy.

[robodad]

I really wish you wouldn't post pictures like that grandpawrichard, I have been trying to save my money for an out of state hunting trip and you may have ruined that for me.

FWIW those pictures really are a disappointment if you ask me !!! NOT !!