Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens

Pros: Superior fluorite element, low weight, f4 constant aperture, solid construction, excellent price.
Cons: Lens collar not included, no image stabilization, dirty white color.

My Buying Decision: After the unfortunate incident involving my late EF 75-300mm lens, a heavy aluminum wall sculpture and my neurotic kitten, I was in the market for a new telephoto zoom lens. If you buy any Canon digital SLR camera (or ...

Pros: Constant aperture, not as big as 2.8 lens, "L" quality
Cons: White color draws attention, on DSLR's it starts kind of long at 112mm

You know the problem with camera lenses? They're never quite long enough, just when you think you have the lens that will reach out there you find yourself wanting just a bit further. The problem is unless you're a pro or have $3000 to invest in your ...

Pros: Exceedingly sharp, great color/contrast, light, smooth operating, internal focus, price
Cons: Many seem to have autofocus inaccuracy issues (discussed in review)

I've been a professional photographer for around 30 years and have bounced between Nikon and Canon systems over that time with Leica thrown in at one point. But overall I've been predominantly a Nikon user. I used to work for an optical company and did ...

Pros: Light weight for its zoom ratio and quality; one of the best!
Cons: White, black, white, black…looks like a zebra!

Over a thirty year period of shooting professionally (glamour and fashion), of all the lenses that I owned (plenty), two lenses were my real money makers. Depending on the brand of equipment that I was using at the time they were the 300mm F2.8 (or 280mm ...

Pros: Sharp, Sharper, Sharpest... What it lacks in speed is more than compensated in image quality.
Cons: After the soreness in the back pocket healed, NONE.

Ok, what can I say? It isn’t cheap, but especially if you shoot outdoors, this is the ultimate EOS tele zoom lens for under a kilo-buck. (In fact, it was actually under $700.00 US) In the world of Canon EOS EF lenses, there are three ...

Pros: Image quality is sharp, vivid colors, light for 70-200, solid build, fast & quiet focus
Cons: Price (but worth it)

I currently shoot with Canon 20D (x1.6 crop factor) and have been using the 18-55mm kit lens & the 50mm f1.8 mkII lens (much sharper then the kit). I've rented few lenses including the 70-200 f2.8 L IS (nice but quite heavy) and the more I used it, ...

Pros: good walk around lens, quiet and fast focusing, good price new, sharp images, great bokeh.
Cons: No tripod collar(expenssive to buy), not ideal for indoor or low light.

Well after owning a Sigma 70-300mm APO Macro DG and getting this lens, it’s definitely a different league. I do think that the Sigma lens is a great all around consumer lens for the price, but it just wasn’t cutting it for me. I quickly ...

Pros: Canon L glass. Very Sharp Results. Weight and price.
Cons: None.

I changed from Nikon to Canon and I was shooting all pro glass fixed aperature zooms before the change. When I needed to purchase a telephoto I did'nt want a large bulky lens. The 70-200f/4L fit my need.

The 70-200 f/4L is a great...

Pros: Light, superlative "L" image quality at a very low price
Cons: f/4 aperture can be limiting for sports/action/wildlife photography and makes teleconverter use impractical.

This lens is a member of Canon's "L" (as in Luxury) series of professional lenses recognizable by the red ring on the lens front.

It is very compact thanks to the use of a calcium fluoride front element, a technology used in high-end...

Pros: Great bokeh, very sharp contrast & color. Fast and accurate AF with silent USM.
Cons: The lens hood kinda ugly but I got 67mm flower hood from ebay.Love it!

I like this Canon white color body, sometimes made people look back and you felt great of it. People noticed that you are serious with photography. And this lens is not heavy to carry around the neck for long time. I compared this lens w/ 17-85 f/3-5.6 IS and 28-135 f/3-5.6. The results was big different. Canon 70-200 f/4 is the champion! Even without IS. Try it and you'll see the result will blow you away!
67mm thread will safe you a lot of money for lens filter besides the front element doesn't rotate when zooming. I use this lens for candid, portraits and landscapes. I combined this lens w/ Tamron 1.4x tele converter still I just surprised It didn't reduce quality of the pictures at all. This a keeper, I LOVE IT!!! I paid it for $600 with $35 mail in rebate and I got extra $160 on gift card from one of the local store. Cheap hah!!!

Pros: Light weight, Image Quality, Constant f/4
Cons: f/4 and not f/2.8, no IS (image stabilization)

The L series lenses rock. I absolutely won't go back to the regular EF lenses, especially when shooting in RAW format above 8 Mega Pixel. The range of this lens is key. It's a telephoto you must have in your bag. The constant f/4 is nice but I would invest in the f/2.8 version. This lens is much lighter than the f/2.8 but the f/2.8 is much more flexible. And if you ever plan on using a 2x extender you'll be going up to f/8 and if you're not shooting with a tripod you'll get shaky pictures. The quality of this lens is top notch and not bad for $600. Some have a hard time swallowing the extra $500 for the f/2.8 or even $1000 more for the f/2.8 with IS (image stability) but if your serious about those photos don't mess around with this lens.

Pros: Nice 'feel' -Zoom ring offers fast zoom with little effort -Very sharp images throughout range
Cons: Color (looks horribly out of place on the 300D)

I am an aviation photography enthusiast and had been using the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Autofocus lens for a little over a year. Though this lens was an inexpensive foray into a fairly powerful zoom, its autofocus was lacking in speed and overall ability.

I decided on the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM because I wanted the speed and image quality of the Canon 'L' glass without breaking the bank. I must say that I am quite impressed with this lens. Autofocus is very fast (and not hindered much, if at all by the addition of the Canon 1.4x II EF-AF Extender, but that is another review!) and accurate. The f4 seems to be more than enough for most circumstances and does EXTREMELY well with aviation photography. I have also found that the 100mm I gave up by going from 75-300mm to 70-200mm can almost be made up for with cropping alone because this lens provides much better detail at 200mm than the 75-300mm did at 300mm.

Pros: Great lens, the absolute bargain lens in Canon's L series range
Cons: For the price NONE, if you want f/2.8 then spend twice as much

This is a great lens, it was the first Canon L lens I purchased and I have absolutely no regrets. This lens focuses well in low light, has good bokeh, is great for portraits and always produces beautiful results. For some examples of what this lens is capable of please review these galleries, the majority where shot with this lens:

http://www.newyorkslideshow.com/galleries_tetons.htm

http://www.newyorkslideshow.com/NY_skyline.htm

Pros: Razor sharp, fast focus, solid, well built
Cons: None

If you own a Digital SLR then this is a lens you should buy. For LESS money than some EF-S plastic lenses you get this rock solid, razor sharp, excellent product. I shoot at very fast speed at F4.5 with this lens and the images are razor sharp. No need for paying twice or three times as much money unless you are a pro shooting indoor sports. If you are a 'pro sumer' etc then this will work just fine.
Note that this is a LONG range telephoto and not for walking around town snapping shots on vacation. This lens is too long for that, especially if you not shooting full senor size. But, if you want a zoom this is it. I can think of zero shortcomings. It is solid and easy to grip, a must for holding steady. It does not come with a tripod ring, and the Canon ring is a rip off, but, I have not used a tripod yet anyway.