In a message dated 4/17/01 4:12:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/17/01 01:25PM >>>
>>>Well just for kicks lets see how everyone feels. You have a choice of a
new
>>>70-200 4.0L or a used 80 200 2.8L for about the same money. Which would
>>>you take and why?
>>>Mark Blackwell
Mark,
You have to come up with your own conclusions. It all depends on what
sacrifices you want to make. When I bought the 70-200 2.8L I thought about
the following things over the 70-200 4L:
-I did want the extra stop to blur backgrounds, although some say it is not
a major difference.
-The 4L is MUCH lighter.
-The 2.8L comes with a tripod collar, a $160 or so purchase on the 4L. I
would never want to shoot on a tripod without this now that I have it.
-The 4L has an odd size filter ring. 67 or something. The 2.8L used the
same filter size as my 20-35 (non-L) and 28070 2.8L.
If I was traveling a lot I think I may go for the 4L because of the weight.
I have heard that it is just as sharp. I'm sure others will give you more to
think about.
After all that, I love this lens. It performs wonderfully and is
complemented bu the 28-70 2.8L.
John >>
Hi,
You also have to consider if you want to use TCs - Canon TCs will not fit
Canon 80-200L lens, (well, maybe with and ext tube), that's why I use new
Kenko Pro TCs on my 80-200L , that are as close as it gets to Canon in
quality. So, 2.8 lens will give you and option to use with TCs easy, while
f/4.0 lens will have some limitations.
Someone said that AF speed is also an issue. True. 80-200L doesn't have USM,
nor FTM. Well, FTM - you'll have to switch the lens to MF focus to touch up
focusing. A bit inconvenient. As far as AF speed - motor in 80-200L is very
fast, very close to 70-200/2.8 in speed, just not as silent.
Also, 80-200L will be a used lens, and I take it 70-200/4.0 L will be new.
While L lenses even used are often in great shape and will work without a
problem forever, it's a good idea to check it, to make sure it is in good
shape. For the above reason L lenses could be more abused by Pros. For the
record - I have Canon 80-200L and it produces great quality images. I do wish
it had FTM, not as much miss USM. But for the price - it was worth it. But
than again, 2.8 over 4.0 is MUCH more important to me than other features.
George
My web page:
http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/Yegey/EntrancePage.html
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
