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.

    Donald Specker, Nov 25, 2007
    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, Nov 26, 2007
    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.