Problems with 70-200mm f2.8 IS

[optical]

I have read in this forum that there are defective lenses in the 70-200mm f4 and 100-400mm, mostly with focusing, and some had to be returned.

There have been less comments on problems with 70-200mm f2.8 IS, perhaps it has better quality control. I will be buying one in the next few days and wonder whether there is something I need to check out.

[KBMphotography.com]

My 70-200 2.8L IS seems fine bolted to my 10D :)

Go purchase and enjoy...!

http://www.pbase.com/image/26060941.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/26061342.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/26061360.jpg

[KennyG]

Alan, was picture 2 waiting for picture 3 while picture 1 looked on? Great shots by the way.

I have never seen a 100-400L reported as having focus problems or the 70-200 2.8. Even the 70-200 4.0 problems I feel are more camera than lens problems.

I tested a 70-200 4.0 for a friend who said it had problems of back focus, stuck it on my 1D and could not get a bad shot out of it. Tried it on my 10D, still no problems. Turned out it was his camera which he got sorted. His camera was fine with his 28-135 both before and after, so go figure.

Be careful of how you interpret some of the claims of bad lens focus you read here and elsewhere. IMHO, suspect the user first, camera second and then the lens.

[martcol]

My 70-200 2.8L IS seems fine bolted to my 10D :)

Go purchase and enjoy...!

Lovely shots Alan, that lens has knocked the 100-400 off the top of my shopping list!

Martin

[KBMphotography.com]

Kenny - have no worries - she survived despite the frayed bit of elastic tied to her!! (111m off the Bridge at Victoria Falls, Zambia)

Martin, the 70-200 2.8L IS works well with the 1.4x as well (which was on for the hippo pic)

[KennyG]

Kenny - have no worries - she survived despite the frayed bit of elastic tied to her!! (111m off the Bridge at Victoria Falls, Zambia)

A friend of mine took her husband to do that same jump off the falls for his 50th birthday!!! Sorry, but not my idea of fun at any age. I did ask if she had increased his insurance policies before the trip. :D He said that he enjoyed it so much he went back the next day and had another go.

I have told my wife that my birthday presents have to have Canon on them and words like MK-II or 1200mm.

[mjordan]

I have been using the 70-200 4.0L for almost 2 years and the 70-200 2.8L IS since last Sept. I've not had any problems with either of them. The only lens that comes close to either in quality is the 24-70 2.8L that I have. I did get the 3year warranty on the 70-200 2.8L IS though. Since I use it outside in action situations a lot, I figured the extra protection was worth it.

The 100-400 is next on my list and I hope to get it in the next month or so.

Mike

[optical]

Thanks for the reassurance. I was trying to decide between the 70-200 2.8 IS and 100-300, and leaning towards 70-200, but those shots posted are amazingly sharp. I am convinced beyond doubt to get the 70-200 2.8 IS.

It is good to have a forum like this to clear some of the misinformation around. Many of the OOF shots I had with my 28-135mm initially were due to camera shakes, so it is easy to blame the equipment. I thought I had a defective 10D until I bought the 17-40mm, and I was very impressed, hence more Ls.