# 70-200f4 LIS USM 70-300 L IS USM



## barbara (Jan 18, 2013)

Hello!
I have a Canon Rebel T2 and 17-55 f 2.8 lens
I want to know for a telephoto lens can anybody help me in choosing between the 70-200 f4 L IS USM and the 70-300 L IS USM
MI is for my travels
thanks


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 18, 2013)

The added reach of the 70-300L is nice and you don't lose too much speed (less than a stop) over the overlapping focal length range. The 70-300L's IQ also compares well to the 70-200 f/2.8 L II + 1.4x. The 70-300L is a little heavier but it is more compact. My vote between the two is for the 70-300L.


----------



## ahab1372 (Jan 18, 2013)

Agree, the 70-300L is a great lens. Since you mentioned travel: It also retracts shorter than the 70-200 (but has a slightly larger diameter I believe)


----------



## greger (Jan 29, 2013)

70-200 F4 IS USM is an excellent lens. I don't think extenders can be used on the 70-300 L making it not as versatile as the 70-200.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 29, 2013)

greger said:
 

> 70-200 F4 IS USM is an excellent lens. I don't think extenders can be used on the 70-300 L making it not as versatile as the 70-200.



How is it less versatile when it effectively already has a built in 1.4x TC (plus you don't get stuck f/5.6 the entire way and it delivers better image quality 201-280mm and 50% faster AF than the f/4 IS + 1.4x TC)? The 2x doesn't look so great on the f/4 IS (and on some bodies you could use a kenko 1.4x TC with the 70-300L if you wanted to also push things).

The 70-200 f/4 IS does seem to AF much better with extension tubes on it though for macro work.


----------



## gamecat235 (Jan 29, 2013)

I have a 70-200L f4 IS and I LOVE it. It's light enough to hand hold all day, the 1.4x extender is a nice thing to have, but for those time when you don't need that reach above 200mm, it's just the easiest lens in the world to use. Aim/compose, focus, shoot. I didn't think I would love the IS as much as I do, but it's a step up from the 17-55 2.8's system (or at least it seems like it to me). 

This lens rarely leaves my camera.


----------



## expatinasia (Jan 29, 2013)

I have never touched or seen the 70-200 f4 L IS USM, but I do have the 70-200L 2.8 ii and the 70-300L IS USM and the 70-300L is a great travel lens as it is relatively light and compact. In daylight the lens performs flawlessly, and it only really struggles in low light. As someone else mentioned, it is not advisable to use a canon extender on the 70-300L but the Kenko pro dgc (or whatever it is called) works well.


----------



## FlowerPhotog (Jan 30, 2013)

I (or should say we) have both, as I bought my wife the 70-200 f4.0 IS this past Christmas. She's let me play with it long enough to run a series of image quality comparisons with my 70-300L. I tried it both on her crop sensor 60D, and my 5D Mk3. At the short end of the focal length range, if anything the 70-300L was maybe just a tiny bit sharper than the 70-200, but both are really outstanding. At the long end the 70-200 was a little bit sharper, and amazingly when I put my Kenko 1.4X on the 70-200, comparing it at 280 vs the 70-300 @ 280, the 70-200 was actually a little sharper in the center, but the 70-300 was better at the edges, but the 70-200 is still acceptable. If you are doing wildlife, etc where have super sharp edges doesn't matter, and 280mm is enough range, the 70-200 + a 1.4XTC is a great choice. I got it for my wife because she likes to hike around and always commented on how heavy the 70-300L is, despite being short and stubby. The 70-200 4.0 IS weighs 1.67lbs vs 2.31lbs for the 70-300L. With her 1.6X crop sensor body the upper end with the 70-200 gives her slightly more native range (320mm effective) than I have with my full frame at 300, so she doesn't feel she is getting shortchanged when we go out shooting together, like she used to when she maxed out at 135mm with the 18-135 kit lens that came with the 60D.


----------



## Tom Surak (Jan 30, 2013)

I purchased the 70-300L as a Christmas gift for myself. I hike to get many of my nature shots, so weight is a big factor, but wanted the extra reach and figured it was not that much loss in speed since I shoot mostly in daylight. The reach is impressive on my 7D and think the IQ is great. Here is a example.


----------



## Zv (Feb 1, 2013)

I love the 70-200 f/4L IS even though it's noisy! However for travel I would opt for the versatility of the 300, if I had one. On a crop that is gonna give you some serious reach. For me personally even f/4 isn't wide enough for indoor stuff, but since you'll most likely be using it outdoors (right?) for wildlife etc in bright daylight (which is the time most tourists go out n about) you'll be alrite with the varying aperture as you zoom. That actually does my head in I pref to keep the aperture constant but thats a different argument! 

I also like the size of the 70-300, seems it would go nicely with a rebel. I believe it's more compact than the 70-200, that can make a difference when lugging gear around in a backpack. 

Have you tried them out? You should test them at a local camera store if you can and then see which one feels right you.


----------

