05-10-2012, 06:32 PM
[quote name='barbara' timestamp='1336670485' post='18099']
Hi !
I have one 550 d
Somebody can help me about choice from 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and 70-300 L IS USM
I need for my travel ( no safari )
Thank you
[/quote]
In short: If you really need a tele for travelling go for the 55-250 IS or 70-200 f/4 IS and add a kenko 1.4x extender to your kit (use only with 70-200). I think the 70-300 L is too heavy for travel. The optical difference is not worth discussing, since both lenses are very close and very good. Otherwise the choice depends on your needs. Here is my story:
I used to use the 70-200 f/4 IS on my 50D on numerous photo trips. Its image quality is spectacular, but on my recent trip to India I have hardly used it, mainly because it is not ideal for shooting portraits, which is my main interest. The reasons are:
1. I felt that even at 750g it was too big and too heavy compared to my 85mm 1.8
2. It attracted too much attention because of the white color
3. It irritated my subjects because of its size and color
4. only about 2% of my shots really required a focal length longer than 100mm
I therefore advise you to carefully consider for what kind of subjects you require a tele and how often you will shoot these subjects. The lesser you have to carry the more flexible and relaxed you are and the better your photos will come out. Believe me, I have lugged a 70-200 f/2.8 through the Himalayas only to find out later that I could have taken the same photos with much lesser lenses. BTW I supply an agencay and a gallery with with pictures, so technical quality is paramount to me. If you shoot portait, you probably can do better without a white lens anyway. Get a good 50, 85 or 100mm instead.
Generally I find a telezoom useful for landscapes, animals and for the few occasion when you really cant get closer or want to use compression. If these subjects constitute only a small percentage of your photography and you still want to carry a tele zoom get a 55-250 IS. Its light, optically solid and a much better lens for travel than the 70-200 or 70-300 if you don shoot tele all the time. (you may also consider the 70-300 non-L or Tamron 70-300, both are optically very good, but a little heavier)
I recommend the 70-200 f/4 with Kenko 1.4 if you are sure that a large percentage of your shots will be made at long focal length. The reason is that the 70-200 is more convenient to use than the 55-250 IS because of its internal zoom and focus and because it feels more robustly build. The better AF of the 70-200 will probably not be relevant to you, as your 550d is not exactly a capable camera when it comes to tracking subjects. Dont asume however that the plastic build quality of the 55-250 will be detrimental to its survivability. These little plastic lenses are surprisingly robust even though they dont feel like they are. The better build of the L lenses is not needed if you are somebody who treats her equipment well anyway. Remebmer , even an L lens will most likly not survive when you let it drop to the ground . It only has an advantage in rain or snow (because of weather sealing) or when you carelessly knock your lens around (I have to do that sometimes, to be ready to shoot or catch a subject)
Hi !
I have one 550 d
Somebody can help me about choice from 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and 70-300 L IS USM
I need for my travel ( no safari )
Thank you
[/quote]
In short: If you really need a tele for travelling go for the 55-250 IS or 70-200 f/4 IS and add a kenko 1.4x extender to your kit (use only with 70-200). I think the 70-300 L is too heavy for travel. The optical difference is not worth discussing, since both lenses are very close and very good. Otherwise the choice depends on your needs. Here is my story:
I used to use the 70-200 f/4 IS on my 50D on numerous photo trips. Its image quality is spectacular, but on my recent trip to India I have hardly used it, mainly because it is not ideal for shooting portraits, which is my main interest. The reasons are:
1. I felt that even at 750g it was too big and too heavy compared to my 85mm 1.8
2. It attracted too much attention because of the white color
3. It irritated my subjects because of its size and color
4. only about 2% of my shots really required a focal length longer than 100mm
I therefore advise you to carefully consider for what kind of subjects you require a tele and how often you will shoot these subjects. The lesser you have to carry the more flexible and relaxed you are and the better your photos will come out. Believe me, I have lugged a 70-200 f/2.8 through the Himalayas only to find out later that I could have taken the same photos with much lesser lenses. BTW I supply an agencay and a gallery with with pictures, so technical quality is paramount to me. If you shoot portait, you probably can do better without a white lens anyway. Get a good 50, 85 or 100mm instead.
Generally I find a telezoom useful for landscapes, animals and for the few occasion when you really cant get closer or want to use compression. If these subjects constitute only a small percentage of your photography and you still want to carry a tele zoom get a 55-250 IS. Its light, optically solid and a much better lens for travel than the 70-200 or 70-300 if you don shoot tele all the time. (you may also consider the 70-300 non-L or Tamron 70-300, both are optically very good, but a little heavier)
I recommend the 70-200 f/4 with Kenko 1.4 if you are sure that a large percentage of your shots will be made at long focal length. The reason is that the 70-200 is more convenient to use than the 55-250 IS because of its internal zoom and focus and because it feels more robustly build. The better AF of the 70-200 will probably not be relevant to you, as your 550d is not exactly a capable camera when it comes to tracking subjects. Dont asume however that the plastic build quality of the 55-250 will be detrimental to its survivability. These little plastic lenses are surprisingly robust even though they dont feel like they are. The better build of the L lenses is not needed if you are somebody who treats her equipment well anyway. Remebmer , even an L lens will most likly not survive when you let it drop to the ground . It only has an advantage in rain or snow (because of weather sealing) or when you carelessly knock your lens around (I have to do that sometimes, to be ready to shoot or catch a subject)