 |
| Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS |
 |
| Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS |
As a wildlife photographer, I use the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lenses extensively on my travel and wildlife photo shoots and camera enthusiasts often ask me which lens do I prefer and what are their pros and cons of each. First, let us look at their respective specifications :
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
- Lens construction : 23 elements in 19 group (1 Fluorite and 5 UD elements)
- Diagonal angle of view = 34 degrees to 12 degrees, 77mm filter
- Inner focusing system with USM
- Closest Focusing distance = 1.2 m / 3.94 ft Maximum closeup magnification .21X
- Diameter x Length, Weight = 3.5 inch x 7.8 inch, 52.6 oz
Canon 70-300mm f/4-5/6L IS
- Closest Focusing distance = 3.9 ft Maximum closeup magnification .21X
- Diameter x Length, Weight = 3.5 inch x 5.6 inch, 37.0 oz
- Diagonal angle of view = 34 degrees to 8 degrees, 67mm filter
- Lens extension via inner focusing and focus cam plus floating mechanism
For the record, I have used the Canon 70-200mm L lens since its introduction quite a few years ago. Now the latest version, Series II offers a 4 stop IS compensation and has a fixed f/2.8 aperture. By comparison, the Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lens is much newer and also offers a 4 stop IS compensation.
Both lenses come with a rounded 8-blade aperture and produce excellent bokeh. Their IS system perform well and both lenses deliver sharp images. Stepping the lens down 1/2 to 1 stop produces even better image quality. The main difference is the additional 100mm focal length offered by the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS but this lens is not compatible with extenders. Add the 1.4X or 2.0X Series III extender to the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II lens and you get an additional 80-200mm in focal length. With the 1.4X extender, the image quality is still very good, but I would only add the 2.0X extender in an emergency because the image quality is fine only with good lighting and tripod support. My philosophy on extenders is I always use my feet to try and close the distance first.
There is another big difference in the two lenses. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II weighs 52.6 ounces and lists for $2,499 while the Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS comes in at 37 ounces and lists for $1,599. I consider both lenses to be a critical part of my Equipment Bag but if one has to choose just one lens, my recommendation is buy the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lens if most of your photography is done handheld and under good lighting conditions. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II lens is hard to beat under any circumstance but one must put up with the weight and price.
Visit my website MichaelDanielHo.com to see many Travel and Wildlife photos taken with both lenses and you can follow my travels on Facebook.
There is another big difference in the two lenses. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II weighs 52.6 ounces and lists for $2,499 while the Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS comes in at 37 ounces and lists for $1,599. I consider both lenses to be a critical part of my Equipment Bag but if one has to choose just one lens, my recommendation is buy the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS lens if most of your photography is done handheld and under good lighting conditions. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II lens is hard to beat under any circumstance but one must put up with the weight and price.
Visit my website MichaelDanielHo.com to see many Travel and Wildlife photos taken with both lenses and you can follow my travels on Facebook.
No comments:
Post a Comment