Enhanced Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras - Lens Only with Improved SEO Review

For this money in the secondary market you can buy if you like to shoot nature. But only during the day, because the lens is dark and it needs a stub like the 2.8 is ii to shoot confidently in the evening. Do not think that it is suitable for portraits, because a short shutter speed is needed for a human face, but you can’t put it here, because the lens is dark, although the background blurs well, but you need to solve the issue with hand trembling

I will write as of 2022, otherwise everyone is already too fond of this lens. In my opinion, the lens is a little old and poorly resolves the matrix crop: carefully look at which camera the reviews are written on, most likely on a full frame. Used please, but take a new one - nafig. I switched to the latest 55-250 IS STM and am more satisfied: yes, the picture is worse and darker, but, damn it, it is sharper! And lies in a pocket in a terry sock and is not a pity.

Sharing my personal usage story. there is a slight backlash when landing in a bayonet mount, Good color reproduction and sharpness.

All the advantages of the L-series, plus a rather modest price, by the standards of this line. "Absolute must-have for those who shoot portraits, flora, animals in the open air, in natural light. Has pros: Quality, quality and more quality! Excellent sharpness over the entire aperture range, body performance - no backlash, pleasant bokeh, resolution - at a height, enough for 24 being a clear glass, even in semi-lit rooms handheld shooting is easy enough at ISO 400-800 Has some cons: Not! For my

so convenient, it calmly fits into a bag for 24-105 you don’ In short, an almost perfect lens, As for aperture 4.0 - with Canon 6D and its ISO range, in principle, you don’t think why 2.8

Got pros: An excellent lens, and given its price, it becomes generally a lens that everyone should have (unless, of course, there is a more top-end model) Plus, it's not too heavy, which is a plus. With its cons: If you have a crop, then it becomes not very convenient, but this is not a minus of the lens, but the features of the crop.

In fact, it is not white, I want to throw all my "budget" there is no stabilizer, I want more aperture, sometimes there is not enough focal length, but this does not affect the quality of the pictures.

Different pros: Constructive - the size does not change during zooming and focusing, the front lens is fixed, squirrels - I want something more telephoto. Different cons: White color - strongly attracts attention, sometimes unhealthy .

Some pros: A wonderful lens, it practically does not smear only 2-4 defects out of 100 frames, it covers the entire frame area with a flash, nice body, light, soft AF stroke, sharp, pleasant bokeh. Cons below: Well, in principle, there are none, aperture, but this is not a drawback for this model, do we want more? We also pay more. =)

Rather, its purpose is "reportage / portrait" paired with some kind of wider zoom (eg, 24-70) is not enough for close-up shots of "squirrels/birds/airplanes" or more.

I'm no expert and can' for the first five by the date of shooting) and laurel were taken with this lens Its pros: Build, aperture, colors, focus speed, quiet motor, lens hood included, appearance makes passers-by look at the camera, and in the village a local official came up and asked for which department I was shooting his surroundings))) Cons: It' fit in bag bought for 600D carcass

The disadvantages are noticeable only in comparison with fixes and models 70-200 2.8 1.8 if you need an inexpensive and convenient reportage lens, Ua/

I had the experience of using his "older" brother with an aperture of 2.8 Well, yes, of course, you should always keep in mind that shutter speeds longer than 1/320 (for crop) can deliver, when shooting handheld, remember that with it it costs 15 thousand more, but if you become capricious about the lack of light, then the price is 80 Ru/users/invinosanitas/album/119768/ there are photos taken with a flash,

The copy went well, It is really many times better than a whale and better than 50 f1.8 of course, but in the future I plan to buy 5dMK2, With skillful use, it can give out just a wonderful picture, Ru/users/ilya-unspace/album/175339/ p=0 Conclusion? For portraits and for street shooting (not landscapes and not architecture) in the range of up to 30 thousand, I don’ if you forget about fixes.

Very happy with them! At first it seemed heavy when worn around the neck, but this is the elka gentlemen))) One has only to try and then you immediately understand that it is not in vain that they are more expensive) Ru/users/max-abdrazakoff/album/342665/

In general, I believe that Canon designed a line of inexpensive optics for full-frame cameras that have an EF mount and an aperture ratio of 4 or higher. While shooting in natural environments with lots of light, the image quality produced by this lens is identical to that of the EF-S equivalents. You need to remember that this is just beginner's optics and treat it as such. The aperture of more advanced lenses is no greater than f/2.8 (not counting those that aren't designated as L). After…

I made the purchase on the 5D Mk || more than half a year ago. I am quite content with the lens; I was able to remove it from my possession while keeping it in pristine condition, free of front-to-back focuses and other foolishness. It works without a hitch. Anyone says that it is not protected from dust or moisture is not making themselves clear to me. Even though it doesn't suck dust from me, I used it to photograph landscapes in freezing rain, snow, and rain, and the camera handled all of…

I took a few shots, but I haven't experienced much pleasure from them thus far. The lack of focus is ultimately my fault because I was watching TV at the time. I neglected to mention that I took the images by holding the camera in my hand; however, the results were much improved if I held my hands firmly or used the tripod. There is no stub to be found. There, prices are different from those elsewhere. The sharpness of the 28-135 is comparable to that of this lens, and the color reproduction is

In point of fact, it is a lovely beige color rather than white. After that, I intend to get rid of all of my "cheap" optics once and for all. There isn't a stabilizer, and I'd like a wider aperture; also, there are occasions when the focal length isn't sufficient; however, the price is entirely different. The least expensive lens in the L-series currently available; nevertheless, this does not reflect on the overall image quality. Has some pros Price is low for the L-series quality. There is…

"Well, it's just some kind of holiday," the person replied (c). Without a doubt, my go-to lens for photography. The device fits comfortably in the hand, all of the adjustments are easy to make and accurate, and the ergonomics are at the very top. The image retains its crispness and clarity regardless of the FR setting or aperture value that is used. The autofocus is tenacious and quick, and the aperture remains constant. It wasn't designed at all to take pictures of hummingbirds at a distance…