Crazy to get ef 200 2.8 vs 70-200 f4 IS?

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Donald Specker, Nov 25, 2007.

  1. I need some more reach, currently using a 100 USM macro (great lens). Since
    I already have the 100 mm covered, I was looking at the 200mm 2.8 L.
    However, the optical quality of the 70-200 mm f4 IS is likely close, and it
    has IS and zoom. It's also lighter. The price difference is not an object.

    Thanks!
     
    Donald Specker, Nov 25, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Donald Specker

    Douglas Guest

    If price is no object, go for the 70 -200 F2.8 with a 1.4x extender. Very
    nice outfit. If the lack of IS doesn't bother you, take a good look at Sigma
    120 -300 f2.8. Just a couple of bucks over the 70-200 F/2.8 and with the 2x
    extender Sigma offer in some stores... You aren't going to get quality reach
    anywhere near the price.

    Think about it. 600 mm F/5.6 and image quality as good as any Canon lens of
    the same range. The downside is $300 for a polariser!!! Huge front element
    but excellent lens.

    Douglas
     
    Douglas, Nov 26, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.