ahmad_qazi

I'm going to order a canon 70-200 4L lens on monday and

wanted to know what would be a good protective (UV or

skylight) filter for it. I searched around but all

this talk about non coated/single coated/multi coated

is a bit confusing. Is the extra cost of the multi-

coated ones really worth it? I've read that it is

very hard to damage them while cleaning them.

So is it just best to go with non-coated ones? If so

is there a brand which has superior quality glass?

Thanks

Thanks to all who answered.

I will most probably go for the 70-200 4L because of its

versatility. Eventualy I will try to get my hands on a

used 85 f1.8 or 100 f2 in order to get a nicer background

blur when I will need it.

The Sigma 500-super does not seem to be very good. Would

anyone have an alternative to propose besides the 550EX.

Anything in Vivitar or Metz?

Thanks

Thanks for the replies...

I love my 28-105 but I find that it is not give a nice

background blur which the 100 f2 does beautifully .

And yes I would like the extra reach that I can get with

the 70-200 4L. I would really come to a compromise

between these two fine lenses. The 70-200 4L is obviously

more versatile. If anyone has some pictures (portraits)

taken with it, it would very helpfull for me.

I like my 380EX but I would like to have more control over

it. specialy on the power side.

One more question.. I've been shooting with fuji NPC 160

and have been getting great results on my 50 f1.8 and good

pictures with the 28-105. In low light conditions, if

I change the film to NPH 400, how will the 70-200 4L perform?

I have been looking for a portrait lens. Previously

I had posted a message about this a while back and

the most of the people said to get the 70-200 f2.8.

I went to the store to try it out and find that it

is too big and heavy. It just isn't practical to

bring it while traveling. After going through some

previous posts I went and looked at the 100 f2 and

70-200 f4L.

I only can afford one of them for the moment.

They both are very nice lenses and seem to fulfill my

needs. My main goal is to do portraits but I would

also like to use it for general photography (travel).

I am leaning towards the 70-200 4L but I would like

to know how good it is for portraits. Most of the

time I will be shooting where there is a lot enough

light. I currently own a 380EX and am thinking of

upgrading to a 420EX or a sigma 500-super. How good

would this flash-lens combination be? I currently own

a 28-105EF and 50 f1.8 with an elan7.

Thanks

Hi,

I looked at keh.com and used 70-200 2.8L are are about 1000$-1100$

(unless I missed something).

A brand new one from BHPhotovideo is 1170$ (USA warranty)

The gray market one is 1070$.

I would rather buy it new since I will be getting the 1 year garanty.

I didn't look at the prices for the other lenses but for this one

it seems just as expensive as a new one (if you buy it from

BHphotovido)

So regarding my original question, would it then be wiser to save

some more money and buy the 2.8L instead of the 4L. Will the

quality of the picture really justify the difference in cost?

I will be mostly doing portraits. I imagine the f2.8 will give

a better backgound blur wide open.

Thanks

Thanks to all of you who responded.

I have thought of finding a 20-200 2.8 used but it is not

an easy find here in Montreal. Of course I could find one

used on ebay but one is never certain of the quality of the

lens when you receive it. Unless you get it from a place like

Adorama or BHPhotoVideo there is always a risk that you are

buying something that might be defective and when you complain

to the seller he might say that it was ok when he shipped it

and that I broke it.

It seems that the Canon 70-200 4L is the most recommended in

this thread. How good is it for portrait work wide open? I

will try to rent one if possible to test it out. Do I really

need the tripod ring?

thanks

I am interested in buying a 70-200 lens for my elan 7.

I have been to the store and have basically narrowed down

my choice to 2 lenses: Canon 70-200 4L and the Sigma 70-200

HSM 2.8

The 70-200 2.8L is way too expensive for me.

I will be using the lens mostly for portraits. Sometimes

for wildlife and landscape photography.

Both lenses are almost the same price. The only thing

with the canon you have to add an extra 130$ for the

tripod ring.

Which one will be best for what I want to do? I have read

so many good reviews about both of them that I find it hard

to decide.

Thanks