Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS

[MediaMagic]

I purchased this lens about two weeks ago and have been using it regularly. I must say, I am extremely impressed. It's extremely sharp. The second generation stabilizer actually does what it is touted as being capable of. I am consistently getting sharp hand held images at 200mm with a shutter speed of 1/15. That's pretty amazing to me.

This lens does have the characteristics of all zooms in that its sharpest photos straight from the camera are shot at smaller apertures in the middle zoom range, but, that being said, this lens is a bit sharper than my 24-70L straight from the camera at max aperture and at min and max zoom. I am duly impressed.

I thought the 24-70L would be impossible to beat without using a prime, but I have to say, this copy of the 70-200L is one absolutely stellar lens.

This is *not* the dell purchase. I ordered it elsewhere and paid the normal going price of approx $1,600US. The Canon 70-200L f2.8IS is the best of the three L zooms I own (24-70, 70-200, 100-400).

I am absolutely pleased with this one.

David

[Belmondo]

David:
Such a ringing endorsement makes me more than just a little jealous! I expect that Santa Claus will be getting an amended wish list from me asking for my own copy of that lens. It sounds fantastic, and I wish you good luck and years of trouble-free service with it.

Speaking of Dell, I recently received an email from my sales rep saying that all outstanding orders for that lens were being cancelled, and within 48 hours, my order simply disappeared from the system. They certainly run a strange operation. (Ask me if I'll ever buy a computer from them.)

Anyway, enjoy your new lens.

Tom

[hericart]

MediaMagic,

I quite agree with you, fantastic lens !

Here's one shot at 1/15 s --> Le chat (http://www.spirit-of-paris.com/index.php?destination=albums/Orbi/html/IMG_0031.inc)



Keep your eyes open,

Hericart
www.spirit-of-paris.com

[MrKickalot]

1/15th freehand? No tri or monopod? Is this lens really $950 better than the Sigma 70-200 2.8? That's a lot of money!!

[defordphoto]

I also vote that the 70-200L f2.8 IS is the best lens in my bag. Would be hard to beat by anyone. It's also just as sweet with the 1.4II TC attached.

A truly amazing piece of glass.

[Belmondo]

I'm one of the ‘500-plus souls that ordered the 70-200 f/2.8L IS from Dell. In my case, they never officially notified me that my order hand been cancelled --- they sort of just deleted it from their order tracking system without an explanation.

Today, they actually had the huevos to send me a customer service satisfaction survey by email.

Please be assured that filling it out was the high point of my entire day --- maybe even the whole week.

Tom

[MediaMagic]

Tom:
Yes, if Santa brings you this lens, you will not be disappointed. You may wanna start the Santa push with Mrs. Claus early! Piss on Dell, if they ever do fulfil all their orders, we can have them bronzed for the mantle. :-)


Hericart:
Nice shot of the hairy beast! :-)



MrKickalot:

I took many shots putting this lens through its paces to see what it is capable of. If it were a situation where a tripod is called for, or monopod, you can bet I'd be using one if I had time for the setup. The IS is not really meant to replace proper photography technique, but rather as a tool for the photographer to be able to pull out of his bag of tricks. That being said though, yes, 1/15 is correct for sharp freehand shots at 200mm. It was consistently sharp rather than a fluke. The IS actually works.

As far as worth the additional cost over the Sigma. That's hard to say in general terms. I haven't had very good luck with Sigma's in the past, so to me, this lens is worth the difference in price because my confidence level in my equipment is paramount. I don't make a ton of money as a photographer, but, I do have several paying gigs lined up over the next couple of months for which this lens will be an integral work horse (and will pay for itself). It has to be able to stand the punishment of serious use and continue to work flawlessly. I'm not bashing Sigma, but, until I have a chance to work with some of the new EX line in situations where my product (and accompanying reputation) isn't on the line, I won't be able to trust them to hold up under heavy use and still deliver the goods because Sigma has let me down in the past. Perhaps the new Sigmas are top notch, I simply cannot verify that with personal experience. I can with Canon.

So, it's more than *just* the stabilizer to me, though it really does work, and yes, you can get sharp hand held images at 1/15 at 200mm, it's absolutely true, but, you could also use a pod with the Sigma or non IS Canon and get the same sharp images. $950.00 is a small price difference to pay for *known* quality and endurance when you really have to have complete confidence in your bag.


RFM Sports:

Man, I am glad to hear your comment about the 1.4 TCII. I was wondering about the image quality and operation. Canon lists this lens as being 100% compatible, but, that doesn't say nearly as much as hearing someone who uses the combo say "sweet".


Take care!
David

[defordphoto]

MediaMagic wrote:
RFM Sports:

Man, I am glad to hear your comment about the 1.4 TCII. I was wondering about the image quality and operation. Canon lists this lens as being 100% compatible, but, that doesn't say nearly as much as hearing someone who uses the combo say "sweet".


Take care!
David

Let the pictures speak for themselves. The following gallery (huge; 500-plus photos) was shot with the 70-200 f2.8 IS with the 1.4II TC:

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/Galleries/SprintBoats/Marsing/index.htm

Also note that the ONLY post-processing that was done at all was when the gallery was created using BreezeBrowser. BB automatically adds USM (adjustable). Otherwise the photos are as they came out of the camera. All EXIF info is available for each shot.

[MrKickalot]

Everyone talks about the 1.4TC working so well but what about the 2.0TC? Does it not work as well or is it just not prefered?? When (I think you all have talked me into it) I get this lens I wouldn't mind the extra focal length for wildlife pictures.

[MediaMagic]

belmondo wrote:
I'm one of the ‘500-plus souls that ordered the 70-200 f/2.8L IS from Dell. In my case, they never officially notified me that my order hand been cancelled --- they sort of just deleted it from their order tracking system without an explanation.

Today, they actually had the huevos to send me a customer service satisfaction survey by email.

Please be assured that filling it out was the high point of my entire day --- maybe even the whole week.

Tom


ROFL! Guess what, I just noticed I received one also. I guess they send it out X number of weeks beyond the initial shipping date. I can't see any other reason why we'd get a customer satisfaction survey unless they send those anytime one places a call to customer service about an order. That's probably it. The call to CS triggers an email as a followup. Makes sense, but...

How ridiculous. "Yes I am satisfied that you answered the phone, but a little less satisfied about the continual runaround, change of order status, disappearance of my order altogether, the return of my order and the return of the runaround. "

They lens me, they lens me not. They lens me, they lens me not.

[MediaMagic]

RFMSports wrote:

Let the pictures speak for themselves. The following gallery (huge; 500-plus photos) was shot with the 70-200 f2.8 IS with the 1.4II TC:

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/Galleries/SprintBoats/Marsing/index.htm

Also note that the ONLY post-processing that was done at all was when the gallery was created using BreezeBrowser. BB automatically adds USM (adjustable). Otherwise the photos are as they came out of the camera. All EXIF info is available for each shot.


I spent about an hour scrutinizing those shots. They really are quite excellent. Especially so considering the extra glass. You've just sold me on the 1.4II TC addition to the bag. My favorite was the "Terminator" exploding from the wall of water.

I like the extra reach of the 100-400 but, I do believe this combo will find its way onto the camera unless I absolutely have to have the extra reach.

Thanks for sharing the shots

[karusel]

Dudes, what about TC 2.0?

[Tin Man]

I read it some where in here TC 2.0 is not performing well with this len.

:)

[CyberDyneSystems]

I've read both positive and somewaht less than positive.

It does work (140-400mm @ 5.6) and autofocus with all Canon bodies.

I hear that Autofocus s actually slowed down by the 2X t-con...

One person insisted that his copy of this lens is sharper with the 2X t-con than with the 1.4X t-con.

Most say the opposite is true.

For the low cost of the 2X T-con (compared to the cost of a 100-400mm IS L ) I would definately get the 2X....

I have both 1.4X and 2X for my 70-200mm Sigma,. and they both work well... but that does not apply at all to this discussion.

[CyberDyneSystems]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20218#113929

[MediaMagic]

MediaMagic wrote:
belmondo wrote:
I'm one of the ‘500-plus souls that ordered the 70-200 f/2.8L IS from Dell. In my case, they never officially notified me that my order hand been cancelled --- they sort of just deleted it from their order tracking system without an explanation.

Today, they actually had the huevos to send me a customer service satisfaction survey by email.

Please be assured that filling it out was the high point of my entire day --- maybe even the whole week.

Tom


ROFL! Guess what, I just noticed I received one also. I guess they send it out X number of weeks beyond the initial shipping date. I can't see any other reason why we'd get a customer satisfaction survey unless they send those anytime one places a call to customer service about an order. That's probably it. The call to CS triggers an email as a followup. Makes sense, but...

How ridiculous. "Yes I am satisfied that you answered the phone, but a little less satisfied about the continual runaround, change of order status, disappearance of my order altogether, the return of my order and the return of the runaround. "

They lens me, they lens me not. They lens me, they lens me not.


Ooops, it turns out that this wasn't a satisfaction survey after all. It was an advertisement for their new MP3 player. Oh well, guess they don't care if *I* am satisfied! lol They just want me to place a different order!

[defordphoto]

MediaMagic wrote:
I spent about an hour scrutinizing those shots. They really are quite excellent. Especially so considering the extra glass. You've just sold me on the 1.4II TC addition to the bag. My favorite was the "Terminator" exploding from the wall of water.

I like the extra reach of the 100-400 but, I do believe this combo will find its way onto the camera unless I absolutely have to have the extra reach.

Thanks for sharing the shots



Thanks, MM! I still prefer shooting the 100-400 cause I usually need the reach but at that particular track we were especially close to the action -- I had a boat come out of the water not 10' from where I was shooting -- so the 70-200 and the 1.4 was the perfect combo that day.

But, the 70-200 is a much better built lens and it's sharper too. Man, I can hardly wait till next season starts...

[Belmondo]

Hey Gang! I hit an important milestone today!

I actually managed to convince my wife that I should buy the 70-200 f/2.8L IS before Canon's rebate offer expires in January. I'm eligible for triple rebates because I've bought two other qualifying L lenses within the last month or two.

Even she's gotten sick of the Dell runaround.

It looks like Santa is definitely on his way!

I'm hoping and praying that they don't become immediately scarce now that I've cleared this one significant remaining obstacle. Maybe I'll jump the gun a little and do some internet shopping tonight.

Hmmmmmm.

[defordphoto]

I found a place that has them. Check your email...

[Belmondo]

RFMSports wrote:
I found a place that has them. Check your email...

Thanks, Jim. I'll check them out. I found one at 17th street as well. I'll probably wait until morning and place the order by phone just to be sure whoever I order it from has it in stock.

Then, the hard part: waiting.

BTW, I have an old friend driving out from L.A. to visit me tomorrow. He's a racing enthusiast who also used to live in the Bay Area, and actually onced raced motorcycles professionally. His wife was actually a trophy girl he met at one of the races he won.

He was with me that day I told you about when we saw Nigel Mansell tire testing at Laguna Seca. He's on the market for a digital P&S to use on a trip he's taking to Hong Kong next month to visit his daughter. I'm loaning him my old G2 and trying to talk him into buying a DSLR for 'important stuff' like racing. Interestingly, his father was a professional photographer many years ago who specialized in motorsports coverage, and my friend still has most of the old Canon manual focus equipment his dad used plus some medium format gear---I can't recall what brand. He even still has the Ftb that died on us that day in Monterey. Sentimental value only, I suppose.

Tom

[defordphoto]

Well, at least you'll know it's coming and not waiting on some Dell-Dream. It's a hefty little lens too. You'll have time to buff-up before it arrives! :)

Yeah your friend needs a dSLR for sure. He'll get there...

I was hoping for some clear weather this weekend so I could go out for a fall-shoot, but it's looking wet...Would be a good weekend to archive this year's stuff to DVD.

[mjordan]

RFMSports wrote:

Let the pictures speak for themselves. The following gallery (huge; 500-plus photos) was shot with the 70-200 f2.8 IS with the 1.4II TC:

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/Galleries/SprintBoats/Marsing/index.htm

Also note that the ONLY post-processing that was done at all was when the gallery was created using BreezeBrowser. BB automatically adds USM (adjustable). Otherwise the photos are as they came out of the camera. All EXIF info is available for each shot.


Ok, Jim. Lets be honest here and not blame those pictures on the lens.


I'm pretty sure that you could take pictures with a 100-300 USM lens and still get outstanding pictures like this. Even your bad ones are pretty good. LOL!

Mike

[hhorwitz]

I have been considering purchasing the 70-200 mm f/2.8L IS with the 1.4x TC to go with my 300D but before investing that kind of money decided to rent them this weekend to see how they actually work in the field. So far I am persuaded that the IS technology works quite well and that, despite the weight of the zoom lens, I will be able to take sharp pictures without a tripod. BUT the camera with these two lenses is still so heavy that when I use one hand to focus or zoom, the other hand feels the strain of the collective weight of the camera and the lenses. For a shot or two, this is certainly manageable. But since I am preparing to take pictures in the bush in Africa next month for days at a time, I fear that it will get tiring rather quickly and, since the whole point of spending the extra money on IS is to avoid using a tripod as much as possible, I am concerned. I already go to the gym so building up my hand strength is not an option at this point!

Has anyone else experienced this? Any suggestions for avoiding hand fatigue other than using only auto focus and zooming in or out only on occasion?

[mjordan]

I had just gotten the 70-200 2.8L IS when I went on a 9 day photo shoot. Although I didn't use the lens totally all the time (I switched to my 24-70 2.8L every once in awhile) I did use it for most of the 3000 or so images I took. The lens I was using most before it was the 70-200 4.0L and there is a weight difference. I didn't have as much problem as I had in the past though because I made a couple of changes. I switched my spare lens to a bag that went on my belt rather than staying in the camera bag I carried that was crossed over my head and tucked under my left arm. This took a lot of weight off my neck but still allowed me to use the bag to rest my left elbow on while shooting.

I also have a very wide and much more supportive camera strap and not the one that came with the 10D (I also replaced the one that was on my D30). This also makes a difference when I'm not holding the camera in the shooting position.

Over all though, I didn't find the weight to be as bad as I thought it would be. All the running around (I was at a big dog show) all day, plus taking care of our own dogs and getting very little sleep was much more tiring than holding the camera. And I don't work out at a gym either. ;D

I think the 10D is better balanced with the lens than a smaller camera would be. And if you have the grip it will probably be even better.

Mike

[robertwgross]

belmondo wrote:
Even she's gotten sick of the Dell runaround.
It looks like Santa is definitely on his way!


Why don't we all have Santa leave a lump of coal in Dell's Christmas stocking?

---Bob Gross---

[Belmondo]

robertwgross wrote:Why don't we all have Santa leave a lump of coal in Dell's Christmas stocking?

---Bob Gross---


Amen.

By the way, according to FedEx tracking, my lens is somewhere between Newark, NJ, and California. I'm starting to get the giggles.

Tom

[defordphoto]

mjordan wrote:
RFMSports wrote:

Let the pictures speak for themselves. The following gallery (huge; 500-plus photos) was shot with the 70-200 f2.8 IS with the 1.4II TC:

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/Galleries/SprintBoats/Marsing/index.htm

Also note that the ONLY post-processing that was done at all was when the gallery was created using BreezeBrowser. BB automatically adds USM (adjustable). Otherwise the photos are as they came out of the camera. All EXIF info is available for each shot.


Ok, Jim. Lets be honest here and not blame those pictures on the lens.


I'm pretty sure that you could take pictures with a 100-300 USM lens and still get outstanding pictures like this. Even your bad ones are pretty good. LOL!

Mike


Hehe...Yeah well I guess one could build a house with a screwdriver if one had to eh? :)

Those 500-plus photos are from a library of over 3000 I shot those two days. And most of the 'bad' ones were planned to be that way. I don't shoot everything 100% sharp. People are too hung up on everything being so sharp that it makes some shots look clinical.

Anyway, yes, I do know what you referring to here in your oblique post and technique is so, so important. You can have the best tools in the world, but if you have no training on how to use them, they may as well be useless stones.

I learned from the best CART/ChampCar shooters and am so thankful I have that experience. Nothing better than shooting side-by-side with the world's best motorsports shooters and swapping war-stories, and technique.

[defordphoto]

belmondo wrote:
robertwgross wrote:Why don't we all have Santa leave a lump of coal in Dell's Christmas stocking?

---Bob Gross---


Amen.

By the way, according to FedEx tracking, my lens is somewhere between Newark, NJ, and California. I'm starting to get the giggles.

Tom

Nothing sweeter than the sound of a FedEx truck rounding the corner with your killer lens aboard.

Like a kid waiting for Santa.

Sweet.

[defordphoto]

For those suffering from 70-200IS f2.8-itis (RSI), join this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20397

[Belmondo]

It's here!
A day early!
Thank you 17th Street
Thank you FedEX
Now, I can get started on my very own case of Repetitive Stress Syndrome!

Tom

[defordphoto]

I knew it was going to be a good day...

[John-M]

MediaMagic wrote:

I thought the 24-70L would be impossible to beat without using a prime, but I have to say, this copy of the 70-200L is one absolutely stellar lens.

I am absolutely pleased with this one.



David,

I agree the 70-200 is one of Canons best lenses hands down. The 24-70 is a really close 2nd. See
http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=182941&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=2#Post186052 for a really interesting comparison of these two lenses with some primes.

John Meara

[MediaMagic]

belmondo wrote:
It's here!
A day early!
Thank you 17th Street
Thank you FedEX
Now, I can get started on my very own case of Repetitive Stress Syndrome!

Tom




hey HEY! been out of town for a few days.. is this the 70-200L you are speaking of? You talked Mrs. Claus into getting before Christmas?

[MediaMagic]

hhorwitz wrote:

Has anyone else experienced this? Any suggestions for avoiding hand fatigue other than using only auto focus and zooming in or out only on occasion?

Hiya hhorwitz,
One thing you might try is the hand strap. I that by strapping the camera snugly to your hand it can alleviate a bit of fatigue by decreasing the required gripping pressure to hold the camera.

I'm not sure if there is a battery grip available for the 300D, but the only hand strap I know of attaches on the right side of the 10D and the batt grip (BG-ED3 I think the actual number is, we just always call it the Big Ed).

Now, another thing is to make sure you are holding the lens with your left hand. I'm not sure of your experience level. If you are new to photography, you may have a tendency to hold the camera, e.g., left hand on the left side of the camera, right hand on the right grip with the shutter. The left hand really needs to hold the lens and your forearm and wrist should be directly under the lens as if your arm is a stiff straight pole extending from the ground to the lens. That way you can spin the zoom or focus ring with your thumb and fingers and still have the weight on the heel or palm of your hand.

[Belmondo]

MediaMagic wrote: hey HEY! been out of town for a few days.. is this the 70-200L you are speaking of? You talked Mrs. Claus into getting before Christmas?

Oh yes, yes, yes!!
I'm taking it out tomorrow and using it for the first time. I picked up a UV filter this afternoon to protect that big, beautiful hunk of glass.

This is better than my first bicycle (can't fall off a lens).

Tom

[MediaMagic]

belmondo wrote:
MediaMagic wrote: hey HEY! been out of town for a few days.. is this the 70-200L you are speaking of? You talked Mrs. Claus into getting before Christmas?

Oh yes, yes, yes!!
I'm taking it out tomorrow and using it for the first time. I picked up a UV filter this afternoon to protect that big, beautiful hunk of glass.

This is better than my first bicycle (can't fall off a lens).

Tom

Excellent! You'll probablyl want to leave the training wheels on it to help carry it around. Nah, it's not nearly as bad as it would seem. I am *sure* you are going to love this one. It's completely Kickamodius Maximus Assimallion... (red neck latin)

Enjoy Santa's early delivery!

[MediaMagic]

John-M wrote:
MediaMagic wrote:

I thought the 24-70L would be impossible to beat without using a prime, but I have to say, this copy of the 70-200L is one absolutely stellar lens.

I am absolutely pleased with this one.



David,

I agree the 70-200 is one of Canons best lenses hands down. The 24-70 is a really close 2nd. See
http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=182941&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=2#Post186052 for a really interesting comparison of these two lenses with some primes.

John Meara


Hey John,
That was a very interesting read for sure. As far as zooms go, these are absolutely the best I have ever used. That was interesting when compared to the primes. Certainly did inspire a tad of controversy. I too think there may have been a tiny focus issue in the test, but I can say with absolute certainty that what I have seen with my copies of these lenses jibes with the head to head comparison between the 24-70 and the 70-200.

Thanks for sharing the link!

David