Which Lens? Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM or Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

[rokfor]

I would just like to get some opinions on these two lenses.

I took photography in high school and college, but have been a graphic designer for the past 13 years, so I haven't really done any photography since college. I bought a Canon Rebel XTi about a year ago and really enjoy shooting, and am now interested in buying a zoom lens. My budget is about $600, so I'm considering one of these two lenses, and wanted to see what you guys/gals might recommend?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM or Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Thanks!
Rob

[Waleed]

Welcome aboard Rob..

The 70-200mm f/4L was one of my first lenses and I enjoyed its sharpness in outdoor and studio photo shoots. One of the other lenses I have is the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS and the f/5.6 IS in low light and ISO1600 is rarely usable; A monopod is required..

Perhaps I'm getting old and my hands are not as stable as they used to be.

[Rogue]

Go with the 70-200L f/4. I have the 70-200 L 2.8 IS and it is an incredible piece of glass! I have read various posts the the 70-200 L f/4 IS is possibly better if you don't need ( or don't have the $$ for) the 2.8.
IS is worth it if you can swing the double in cost but you will not be unhappy with the non-IS.

[SquirrelDip]

Looking for lenses is the toughest purchase I've probably had - soooo many pros and cons to every lens.

L glass is very addictive and will last many years so If you can afford it my preference is always towards the L.

Between the two lenses you've chosen I'd go for the 70-200 f/4 L. I'd really consider saving a bit and get the IS version. Eventually you can pick up the 1.4x extender.

[Fireice_2]

To make your buying decision harder;

I'd throw in the Tamron SP 70-200mm F2.8 into the equation. It doesn't have the white lens status, but optically its great and you get F2.8 speed. Much better than the 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS.

So for the money I suggest a toss between Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 and the Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM.

[Dirk]

i would buy the IS version because especially at 300 mm it is hard to hold it steady IS will help unless you shake too hard. And if you use telephoto in bad light siuations a f2.8 wouid be nice .

[showtm490]

70-200 f4 with no doubt.

[ohenry]

No comparison, in my mind. It's like comparing a Lexus to a VW. The 70-200 f/4 is in a completely different league than the 70-300.

[rokfor]

Sounds like my decision is made...thanks for all the helpful input!

Rob

[Tx_40d]

Hello Rob,

I think it really depends on what you're planning on shooting. I really like the 70-300 for outdoor events/sports and when I'm out hiking due to its light-weight, super handy zoom range, and IS (which has allowed me to shoot at the longer end without a monopod and in less than optimal conditions). The 70-200f4 is a great lens and I'm sure you will be more than happy with it, but if your getting a zoom for any of the reasons I listed you may want to reconsider the 70-300IS or saving up a little more and getting the 100-400L if you need even more reach.

thanks,
Tx_40d