Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Reviews

Jul 25th, 2006mstaffo

Priced Paid
$650 USD

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
More than a year

Fantastic lens! Handles much better than the F2.8, and is a lot lighter to boot. Exceedlingly sharp for a zoom, just try an extreme blowup to see what I mean.
Aug 12th, 2006shooter

Priced Paid
$700

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
Less than a month

For a last 6 month I've tried to find a good enough tele-zoom lens.
This was a really hard to make a right decision for me to buy a good quality lens due lack of budget. I asked myself: "Hey, man, what do you need? Do you really so need a good picture? Do you ready to spend extra $300-500 for that?". I'm an amateur and don't make money on shooting. So, i spent a lot of hours at the stores and make many shots with various lenses.
And when I saw that shots at home the answer was clear: "That one!".

Pros:
1. Superb build quality! Feels like it's solid metal. And looks like it's dustproof.
2. Fast and very quiet autofocus.
3. Clear and sharp images.
4. Colours is really great! Much better than EF 50 f1.8
5. Much lighter than f2.8 but heavy enough ;)
6. Great value for money! The best "L"-quality tele-zoom i've ever seen!

Cons:
1. No tripod mount in package
2. It's difficult to operate with lenshood when blend is attached
3. f4, but who cares ;) I'ts "junior EF 70-200 F2.8"
4. No rubber ring on EF-mount

P.S. I paid $700 in Moscow (Russia) wor this baby
Sep 6th, 2006Sukiari

Priced Paid
$450

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
More than a year

I need to be a voice of reason here. This lens is a nice optical performer wide open, and improves a bit when stopped down. The barrel is a hybrid of metal and plastic (NOT ALL METAL as some would have you believe). AF is fast, but not blindingly so. The focus ring turns smoothly but is 'dry' feeling like other USM lenses.

I acquired an EF 135 f/2.8 SF, and after that purchase found myself using the 70-200 f/4L less and less. The 135 somehow renders fine detail more crisply, but overall contrast is slightly lower. AF is just as fast if not faster than the 70-200 f/4L, and the lens is much more compact. It is also a stop faster which helps tremendously in all kinds of situations. The 70-200 also flares badly unlike the 135.

All in all, the 70-200 f/4L is a decent enough lens, but for my purposes cannot compete with the 135 SF. I sold the L and kept the prime.
Nov 6th, 2006dturina

Priced Paid
$600

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
Less than a year

Very sharp, contrasty, no geometric distortions. Colors are excellent. Sharp even wide open. However it is extremely prone to flare; forget shooting into the sun. It's great for potraits; not as sharp as 85mm f/1.8, but still excellent. It's a great lens for landscape details, too. Tripod collar is an expensive option, so it might actually make more sense to go for an f/2.8 version if you shoot from a tripod/monopod a lot.
May 7th, 2007BillB

Priced Paid
450

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
More than a year

Great lens very sharp where you need it most - wide open. Build quality superb. Focusing very fast and virtually silent. The weight and balance are good on 10D or 5D. Constant length means no dust being sucked in but makes the lens more visible. Drawbacks are that it is not a lens for covert use. I love this lens.
Aug 6th, 2007brianball

Priced Paid
$575

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
More than a year

This is a great lens and ideal for anyone for whom its lighter weight outweighs the extra stop of the f/2.8. It may not equal the sharpness of a prime lens, but it is about as sharp of a zoom lens as one can find. The only real negatives are the high price for the tripod ring, and the very large hood. You cannot rotate a polarizer with the hood attached, and on a tripod, the hood can pickup wind and bring the weight too far forward.
Dec 8th, 2007Ago

Priced Paid
$535

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
More than a year

This lens is spectacular!
Almost threedimensional.
See if you agree:

Would not trade this lens for a heavier and bulky 2.8.
And I remember to play with ISO for a non-IS steady shot.
Great!
Nov 17th, 2015Alwev

Priced Paid
350 s/h

Product Understanding
Good

Time Owned
More than a year

This lens has an unbelievable depth of field. A tad, tad, tad softer than my 24-105 at the same focal lengths but the DOF of this lens makes it better for me. However this can be used at f4 and the 24-105 is a tad soft right hand side at f4. Very good value for money. Light, easy to use and fast focussing. I borrowed my friends heavy f2.8 version before I bought this. I could not compare the image quality but the cost and WEIGHT for one stop, no way. I bought a Zeiss Sonnar 85mm f2.8 which was a tad sharper but had zero DOF so sold it straight away and kept this 70-200

Write a Review

You must be logged-in or registered to add a review.

photodo Stats

1102 lenses
428 MTF tests
74 in-depth        photodo reviews
100+ users join each day

Help the lens community by reviewing or rating a lens today via our lens search