Is the 70-200F/2.8 Really That Good...Maybe I Should Sell Mine

[mrclark321]

Well mine is of to Canon to get recalibrated. I only had it for a day but I find it heavy compared to the f/4. Wondering if I should sell it and get another f/4 and a 17-40L.
How much is a 70-200f/2.8 worth in Canada?

Dan

Or should I keep it!!

[PetKal]

*A new one is $1700 CAN + 15% PST/GST in couple of Toronto camera stores. (The f4 version retails for $900 CAN which is almost 1/2 of the total cost of its faster sibling).

I think I can understand your dilemma.
* The 2.8 version is heavy. There is much to be said about f4's ergonomics advantages. If I can go back in time, I am unsure if I would have chosen the 2.8 over the 4.0 again.

[grego]

Yes it is. Did you buy yours new? I recall you buying it from someone off FM. Possibly would have been easier if bought it new, but regardless, you'll love the lens once it works well.

[Big Hands]

I also traded up from the f/4L version, but I have no intention of ever going back (even though I think pretty highly of the f/4L). The f/2.8L has netted me so many more in focus good looking shots that I'll suffer the weight penalty gladly. YMMV.

Regards

[mrclark321]

Thanks...Yes I baught it used of FM and it looks to be in excellent shape, just the problem with the distance buttons sticking. I sent it to Canon and I hope it comes back better than new. The weight issue still bothers me. Maybe if I see the results this lense can produce I will change my mind!!

Dan

[mrclark321]

Too many choices!!!

[mrclark321]

Opinions!!

[Dante King]

Well its hard to get as old as Dan is and lose all that muscle mass and have to lug a fast lens around.. ;) I would say start pumping up and keep the lens. 2.8 rocks. I am losing all my slower stuff and made a personal promise that I would not buy any lens slower than 2.8.

[Music to my eyes]

It is definately worth it. Keep it! It is so versatile, and the weight thing - it is all relative. Your 20D seems massive compared to someone who is used to a point and shoot, so you need some time to get yourself 'calibrated' to the size of your new lens.
I love mine, and love its versatility in low light and its great colour and contrast. You will kick yourself if you sell it ;) f2.8 - that bright viewfinder look, speed and bokeh is worth it.
I mainly use the 24-70L, but if I need longer, I am really glad I have the 70-200 2.8 (IS). It is sharper than the 24-70L too.
Eugene

[EoSD30fReAk]

start lifting weights while it's at canon;)

it's a wonderful lens and you'll certainly will regret it when you sell it.

like said earlier if i had to make the choice again i would definitly take the 2.8 again over the f4.

[tim]

It's a big, heavy, fantastic lens, I love mine even though I don't use it very often. The IS version's fantastic. Some advantages of a lens that big are that people get out of your way pretty quickly, they assume you're a pro who knows what they're doing, and they let you wander pretty much wherever you like! :)

[grego]

What's funny is i've used Nikon's 70-200 VR, and it was so small and tiny compared to it. Didn't like the feel of it at all. Didn't work well in the very low light.

[Sean-Mcr]

Had you never actually held the lens before you went out and bought one? How something feels to a person is very important and these are expensive items and not to be entered in to lightly. I think the person you bought it off should have told you about the fault i think he's treated you poorly

No matter how good something is, it's only of use if you're actually going to use it otherwise it's a glorified paper weight. When you get it back give it a solid weeks field test to see how it feels to you
Just take that lens


The F.4 version is much lighter, the 2.8 has that extra stop but if you feel it might be too heavy to hand hold you’ll get little gain over the F.4. Which is why I’d have done what Tim’s done and get the IS version

[mrclark321]

Thanks everyone for the input. Well I have my new flash to keep me busy for a month until the lense comes back from Canon. As stated I will use it for a week and make my decission after that.

Dan

[Steve Parr]

I bought my 70-200mm f/2.8 L last week, and I'm amazed at the sharpness of it. I thought about returning it and stepping up to the 100-400mm IS, but opted not to. It's just too nice a lens...

Steve

[xuxu1]

For me it would have to be the IS Version. I could live with the f4 if it had IS but it does´nt. :cry: So i´m still saving for the 70-200L IS. ;)

In your case... if the recalibration works fine for you then you might want to keep it.

ED

[xuxu1]

I bought my 70-200mm f/2.8 L last week, and I'm amazed at the sharpness of it. I thought about returning it and stepping up to the 100-400mm IS, but opted not to. It's just too nice a lens...

Steve
Both lenses are terrific! I have the 100-400L IS already since some time. But as they are two different lenses for different kinds of photography... I need both! :lol:

ED

[rklepper]

I use mine on a monopod all the time. Works great.

[xuxu1]

I use mine on a monopod all the time. Works great.
Yup... A monopod is real nice. But... IS (for me) is even nicer.
IMO IS gives you more versatility. Of course you do need a monopod (or tripod) for those big and heavy "impossible to handhold" lenses. ;)

ED

[schmoelzel]

I too have owned the F4 and now have the f2.8 non-IS. Yes, it is heavy but I don't find that it bothers me that much. If anything, it makes for a nicer balance with the camera body. As far as sharpness goes, it is as sharp as the F4; some claim sharper some claim less sharp. I think that all of the 70-200L zooms from Canon are equally sharp. With the f2.8 aperture, I found that the AF is a lot faster than the F4. This really helps with quick moving subjects. Also, from my brief time with the F4, I think the contrast is better with the f2.8 version. I have a lot more shots that are keepers with the f2,8 version; that is probably due to the fact that I have a little more experience now than I had when I owned the F4.

All in all, I would recommend you keep the the f2.8........unless you find the weight that prohibitive that you rarely use it!! Then it's not worth it.........I have really moved to basically all prime lenses but the 70-200F2.8 zoom is one that I think I will probably keep!