• Page :
  • 1
  • Text Only
Voting History
rated:
I wanted to list this one separately since it's a great deal AND IT'S ACTUALLY STILL IN STOCK. This is the least expensive way to get an L medium-long-range telephoto lens. It's on sale new for $629 on Amazon at the moment.

Link

Canon
See Canon coupons that earn Up to 2.5% FatWallet Cash Back.
Member Summary

Canon 70-200 f/4L Refurb
Thanks Neilium
Disclaimer
Staff Summary
  • Also categorized in:
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

Good deal but be aware this is not an image stabilized lens. (I was thinking 'why is this so stupid cheap' until I realized0

If it fits your use, great deal. If you're not a seasoned photographer who knows what they need...you will probably be hampered by the lack of IS and disappointed by the pictures you get.

Overall...a very inexpensive way to get into a L telephoto zoom.

I have this exact lens. Yes, it is not the IS version, but it is still an amazing lens - very sharp. It is a good tripod lens, because then you don't care about the IS, and it is light enough to not need a separate tripod mount (the IS version and the 2.8 version are both heavier). As a carry-around lens, it's true that you might be more challenged, but you could use it a higher ISO if your camera gives you decent results at higher ISO. And it's sharp even at F/4.

Even at this price, I can't justify it over the stellar value of the 55-250 IS lens. I don't think in the average shooter's hands that giving up the IS is worth it. Check this thread for 55-250 samples:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=459569

The 70-200 has a little punchier colors, but that's easy to tweak in post-processing. But I'm not threadcrapping--if the 70-200/f4 non-IS is what you want, this is a great deal.

OOS.

the 55-250 is not a tack sharp lens.
Is can be overrated, as it doesn't necessarily get you a good shot in manual mode.
A better comparison would be the canon 70-200 2.8 at F4.

Eddie3dfx said:   the 55-250 is not a tack sharp lens.
Is can be overrated, as it doesn't necessarily get you a good shot in manual mode.
A better comparison would be the canon 70-200 2.8 at F4.


LOL at that...sorry. If you are publishing photos (as I have done) or printing 20x30 then sure, you need tack-sharp glass and FTM. Normal people do not and would benefit greater from IS because their technique is amateur and they don't know or take the time to stabilize properly. Better to save up for the IS version. And it's OOS now anyway.

Toddler said:   Even at this price, I can't justify it over the stellar value of the 55-250 IS lens. I don't think in the average shooter's hands that giving up the IS is worth it. Check this thread for 55-250 samples:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=459569

The 70-200 has a little punchier colors, but that's easy to tweak in post-processing. But I'm not threadcrapping--if the 70-200/f4 non-IS is what you want, this is a great deal.


I didn't think my wife would let me (yet) spend (even) this much on a lens, so I added-on the 55-250mm IS II for $149 (Amzn) back in August. I agree that it's an extremely-good-value lens and it's very portable.

On another note, the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 was on sale for $7xx, but already OOS. If I had more than $400 to spend, I'd probably lobby for a little more and buy this bad boy to replace my kit.

That is a good deal on that lens,I have one and also a Canon 70-300 mm F/4-5.6 EF IS USM that is a cheaper lens .IMO I think the 70-300 is as good in most cases as the L lens,Sure the L series are metal and tougher but this one is not weatherproof like the expensive L lenses.
Using both with my 60D I have taken alot of wildlife shoots and the 70-300 wins because it has IS.
I still use the 70-200 but if something is moving the IS lens is better.The 55-250mm IS II is also a good lens .So it all depends on ones needs.
I know the L lens looks like a pro lens when carried around sure,In the end it the person taking the pics that count.



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014