Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L

DisasterDan · Feb 16, 2011

Yay or Nay?

Does anyone have it and have any major problems with it?
On one review it stated that "Softens a little above 135mm approaching and at 200mm at infinity"
Also, to anyone who has it...would it be unbearable to carry around for per say a 7 hour shoot? or is it acceptable? Thanks for any input, its much appreciated.

Sw1tchFX · Feb 17, 2011

I've used it before and it's ok. The images reminded me of my 80-200 f/2.8D: lousy at f/2.8 but fine otherwise.

Big Mike · Feb 17, 2011

I've got the 70-200mm F2.8 L IS (original version). It's a fine lens, it is/was a workhorse for most professional Canon shooters. There is a new version (II) which is said to be sharper, which really comes into play with today's high density (high MP) sensors....but the new version is a fair bit more expensive than the older one.

Yes, it is heavy and can cause some stress on your joints & muscles after a long day of shooting. It's essential to develop & use a good technique for carrying & using this thing.

The F4 version is a fantastic lens and a good deal smaller & lighter. With today's cameras and their great high-ISO performance, the F4 version is a very viable option.

DisasterDan · Feb 18, 2011

Alright thanks for the input, im gonna go check out the newer version and also see if my local shop has the f/4 version.

DM1975 · Feb 18, 2011

I am about to purchase the non IS version of this lense. Would it be better to get the f4? I plan on using it for some wedding and portrait work, along with sports and outdoor photography. Being that I plan on using it for some portrait work I feel I need that smaller dof. Should I worry about that or will the f4 be just fine? I have heard so much good about this lense (f2.8) I figured it would be fine all around.

Big Mike · Feb 18, 2011

Even though it's only one stop, it is beneficial to have the ability to use F2.8 vs F4. It does give you a shallower DOF and it does double/half your shutter speed.

Of course, if your camera can handle high ISO, then the shutter speed isn't so much of an issue, but as it gets darker, there will always be times when you'll be glad that you have F2.8 at your disposal.

IS is also a tough choice. It certainly helps when you're shooting at 200mm and can count on getting sharp shots at 1/30...but moving subjects will still blur at slower shutter speeds, so shooting people/sports etc. requires a faster shutter speed...and IS won't cut it....but it still doesn't hurt.

All of this is why I bought the F2.8 L IS. That way, I wouldn't have the nagging feeling that if I had just spent more, I'd have the best tool. Now, I know I have the best tool for the job. Well, that was before the new II version came out....

Robin Usagani · Feb 18, 2011

if you buy the F4 non IS, it is significantly lighter and smaller. IMO, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS first generation is the best for the $.

DM1975 · Feb 18, 2011

I do wish I could get the IS version I had a 300mm F4 IS before and loved the IS on it. I am about to purchase my first digital SLR (A used 50D) and really want that extra stop, but I just can't afford to get the 2.8 IS. For me, weight is not so much of an issue, even though lighter would be nicer.

Big Mike · Feb 18, 2011

Schwettylens said:
IMO, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS first generation is the best for the $.

I would also add that in terms of image quality, the F4 non IS, is a very good bang-for-the-buck lens. It's only what, $700. And it's one of the sharpest zoom lenses available.