Even if you don't care about hitting f/2.8, the Sigma and Tamron f/2.8 lenses are simply better (though only slightly) than the Canon f/4s; for the people who are looking at the Canon f/4 as a way to save money, the Tamron 70-210 saves you even more for the same performance with a better warranty. I wholeheartedly think the Tamron is sharper and likely has better stabilization. But I don't think they can match Canon on the AF. It may be close on the bare lens, but introduce a 1.4x or 2.0x and I bet the Canon stands out. That said, I can't honestly say one is a clear winner over the other. Cons. Some distortion. Large. Not an f/2.8 zoom. The Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS ($1,499.99) is a telephoto zoom lens for Sony's full-frame mirrorless camera system. A 70-200mm zoom is the go-to Rent cameras and lenses at http://lensrentals.com, coupon code 'northrup15' for 15% off!We compare two lenses, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 mark 2 vs. the mark 3. If you can live with f4 lens, the Canon 70-200 f4 IS is not far behind from the Canon's best and costs about the same as the Tamron. Macro guy's gear list: Macro guy's gear list Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM +4 more I wonder how does the oder version, nFD 80-200 f4 non-L with 1/4~1/5 price, perform when comparing with the L version ? Canon FD 80-200 f4L. Non L version. The answer is, not very well as it's a 1976 design which was rebodied for the New FD line. The (at the time) much cheaper 70-210mm f/4 trombone zoom released in 1980 actually slightly psTYr5. Switched from Canon 5D series to Sony a7 series but kept my Canon 70-200 f/4 IS. Even with a Metabones IV adapter, I got a lot of out-of-focus shots of a rapidly moving small child. Sold the Canon and bought the Sony f/4 70-200 and eliminated the problem. I can't say which lens is shaper -- it's hard to compare zooms. DOF and bokeh will be one consideration for portraiture. 200mm can really compress the BG but the 135s likely have better contrast and separation. Low light another consideration. The versatility of a zoom cannot be ignored however, and the 70-200 f4 is a good lens though I sold mine and went to the 70-200 GM 2.8. The weight difference to the new 70-200 f/2.8L is the adapter only. It is also the height of the adapter taller. Here is a size comparison curtesy of camerasize.com. Adapted EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS vs. RF 70-200/4L IS and RF 70-200/2.8L IS. Edit: Also have the control ring based adapter so I get that functionality already with the EF lens. hitting the streets (at least in Chicago). So here is where input is. required: the Canon 70-200L f2.8 is selling for less than the L f/4 IS. (approximately $100.00). In my case, I would be using the lens in a varity of. situations as a walk around lens for general daylight use and inside at small. The Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8. Let's not forget Pentax's previous fast full-frame zoom. This film-era autofocus lens was produced from 1994 to 2004 ( view specifications in our database) but still commands fairly high prices second-hand. We compared this lens to the D FA* 70-200mm and immediately observed that superiority of the newer optical A really exciting (and very expensive) new RF mount lens arrives for Canon EOS R mirrorless cameras. Can it offer great image quality as well as such a small

canon 70 200 f4 vs f2 8