Is the 70-200 2.8 really that heavy??

[DionM]

I'm just about to bite the bullet and get a 70-200 f2.8.

But everyone says its too heavy for frequent use. Is it really that heavy? I tend to go on a full day's shooting, carrying my bag with me everywhere.

When walking around I plan on carrying 20D, 17-40, 70-200 2.8, 1.4x flash and 50 f1.8 (if I expect I will be shooting in low light). Maybe my 100mm macro if I think I will encounter flowers.

The 70-200 is thus a "walk around medium tele" lens. I know I should be considering the f4 version, but I think I would like that extra stop of light. But I am concerned about the weight - as some posters have said its no good at home because its too heavy ...

I am hoping by changing to a backpack style camera case I will alleviate some of the weight concerns. Plus I plan on getting a 50-500 or 400 f5.6 as my long tele lens so there will be even more weight in the pack eventually ...

[Mchu86]

It's not THAT heavy, but it sure isn't light (for me anyways). I've went through about 6 innings of a baseball game handholding that lens and my forearm was tired after that. At times, I had to support the lens on pole of a fence for a little bit, and then lifted it back up again. I'm looking forward to building up my muscles though! =P

[Marvinspu36]

A monopod works wonders for relieving arm strain, plus helps stabalize those long telephotos :) .

[DionM]

A monopod works wonders for relieving arm strain, plus helps stabalize those long telephotos :) .

Yes true ... though if I'm going to take a monopod, I might as well get the f4 version so I can get the extra stop of steadiness :)

[jonniewalton]

I have no problems with it at all but a comfy camera strap is a good idea. To hand hold the camera and lens is fine but then i am fit and strong. My wife can cope with it but does find it heavy after an hour or so but as she points out. It isnt as heavy as her handbag!

[abel]

i definitely recommend shooting with a monopod or a tripod with a 70-200 f4 or f2.8 version...

it simply makes for cleaner sharper images especially if you have to use a slower shutter spped like 1/90 or 1/125 etc... this will help minimize camera shake etc...

i have a f2.8 and i try to use a support the majority of the time...

[Fills]

I have the 100-400 and find it heavy, but never to heavy to bring with me. Meaning, it's well worth the purchase / weight and I'll be adding the 70-200 2.8 at some point as well.

[Deckyon]

Don't let anyone talk you out of the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS lens. It is the lens I use the most and I love it. I tried the non-IS for about half an hour and I took it back. the f/2.8 is too heavy for handheld without the IS. I use mine in combination with a monopod and a loose ball head. The monopod takes the weight, and with the ball head free to move, I rely on IS to help get the sharp photos. I am always walking around with my 1D Mark II and 70-200mm and the monopod. That is a hard to beat combination.
handheld in low light - http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-182

I am a big guy, and carrying around the 1D MkII, 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS and monopod is not a big deal. I have had it straight for 12 hours at a stretch from time to time. Yes, that includes dayhikes.

As to the Extenders - here are a few shots from my book with the 70-200mm and the 2x tele (400mm @ f/5.6) The teles will allow you go get the extra reach and get the shots you would otherwise miss. Not every single image can be tack-sharp. Below are images that have been cropped or resized for the internet. Some resolution was lost in the process.

handheld (not full zoom) - http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-181
50% crop - handheld - http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-175
Handheld (full zoom) - http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-176
W/ Monopod - http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-177

Notice the key word here is HandHeld. Yes, a tripod would have been choice, but the time needed when walking about in a marsh-like area and woods would have made me miss the shots...

Definatly get a photo vest. It can help a lot with the other gear (50, flash, telec.) Shoot once with the 70-200 and once with the 50-500 and I can pretty much guarentee that the 50-500 will go back. On the trip to Reelfoot, one of the photographers brough a 50-500 down, we all tried it out (tripods mandatory with that one) and I was happier with my 70-200 w/ the 2x teleconverter than the shots with the 50-500. It was unanimous among the group that the 50-500 was a waste of money. Of course, we all (but one) had L glass to start with.

[Mike Panic]

heavy is good - helps to stabilize shots better... and you wont need to go to the gym as often

[cmM]

never held one. But I know for a fact that the IS version is the heaviest lens I've ever handheld :-P

[MDJAK]

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS and I love it. I feel it is too heavy for casual shooting though. And I love my Gitzo carbon fiber monopod. Also, the side strap helps. Right now, I've used it with my 20D, after the 10D. I'm getting the 1Ds Mark II. I'm sure that is going to be a very heavy combo.

[ShutteringFocus]

I have the Sigma version and its on my camera all the time. I hardly shoot with anything else.

[Woolly Joss]

I got my 70-200 f2.8 last week and used it for the first time at the football (soccer) on Saturday.

After reading the reviews I wasn't sure what to expect weight-wise, and while it is heavy I don't think it's as bad as some folk make out. Although I normally use a monopod at the football, I hand-held it for the second half of the game (about 45 minutes) without any real problem.

I wouldn't let the weight put you off buying it.

[lime]

It's all relative.
I'm 5'-4" and typically have in a backpack a 10D with grip (weight is close to the 1 series), 50 1.8, 28-135IS, Canon 1.4x & 2x, 300 2.8IS (hood reversed), bogen 682B monopod, 550EX, 420EX, flash diffusers & misc. Couple of other things I might add, if I know I'm going to need them, are the 135 2.0 & 420EX. All of this in $60 Eddie Bauer backpack bought from Target a couple of years ago.
I use to have a 100-400IS, which is close to the 70-200, & had no problem shooting handheld with it. I have an Optech strap for the camera which helped a lot with the 10D/Grip/100-400 combo.
When shooting with the 10D/grip/300 2.8 handheld, I use the strap on the lens and let it hang from my neck guided by my left hand.
I tried a shoulder style bag & that did not work. My shoulder was sore in a Shorter amount of time, even without the monopod. The backpack was definitely better for my situation.

Emil

[donlavange]

[QUOTE=Deckyon]Don't let anyone talk you out of the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS lens. It is the lens I use the most and I love it./QUOTE]

Ditto on this. I love this lens! At a basketball game with all the exitement and the handhld shots, I never even notice the weight.

[Persian-Rice]

I don't think he is talking about the IS model.

Anywho IS or no Is, the lens is awesome. I have a review on FM and discussed this. I am a big boy (power lifter) and after a hockey tournament, my arm was dead. Mind you was standing and holding the lens up for about 4-5 hours straight which is going to put a strain on you even if it was the f/4.

It is heavy, especially if you are supporting it for a long time and constantly zooming in and out.
Seriously though, the size and weight is more then worth it. It gets you the attention you sometimes need to get a good shot(my pro trick in general chat), the F4 is quite a bit smaller, but also doesn't help if you want to be inconspicuous. The most important thing is that it saves you on the stops, which is so very important. I know people complain that at that weight you need IS, I have never had shake issues, even when shooting indoors.

[Ballen Photo]

I'm just about to bite the bullet and get a 70-200 f2.8.

But everyone says its too heavy for frequent use. Is it really that heavy? I tend to go on a full day's shooting, carrying my bag with me everywhere.


On camera, I dont really think it's bad at all, in fact, it seems to give the camera a nice balance(For Me) when holding the lens with my left hand and shooting with my right.
Where it seems to get heavy is when toting it around in my bag with my other lenses and equipment. ("Grunt" Who put that bar of lead in my bag?):lol:
-Bruce

[Jon]

Where it seems to get heavy is when toting it around in my bag with my other lenses and equipment. ("Grunt" Who put that bar of lead in my bag?):lol:
-Bruce

This should improve in the next few years. Canon's committed to moving to lead-free lenses for environmental reasons.

:{)#

[DionM]

Thanks guys.

I'm fairly tall (6'8" actually :)) so size isn't a real issue, just people talking about the weight.

Am ordering the sucker today :)

Thanks for the side note on the 50-500 too ... I shall get the 400 f5.6 instead.

I want the 1.4x TC for the 70-200 to bump it out, and also for (MF, I realise) the 400 f5.6.

[Mogwyth]

Yes it is, it's exactly the advertised weight, no more no less.:lol:

I use the Sigma all day with just a hand strap and I am a lazy desk jockey:o, the Canon is not that much heavier, but a monopod is always useful.

[abel]

one thing to consider... instead of getting a 400 f5.6 i see alot of people getting the 300 f4 and using the 1.4x converter to make it a 420 f5.6 with autofocus.

i hear the 300 f4 lens produces much better images than the 400 f5.6 plus u get extra flexibility since u can also shoot at 300mm at f4!!!

i think this may be something to consider... i know i have. if i were to choose a longer lens than my 70-200 it would be the 300 f4

[DionM]

Yes it is, it's exactly the advertised weight, no more no less.:lol:

I use the Sigma all day with just a hand strap and I am a lazy desk jockey:o, the Canon is not that much heavier, but a monopod is always useful.

Yeah I know canon advertise the weight, but short of duct-taping a brick to the front of my 20D I wouldn't know how it feels as a lens :)

[abel]

i also thing a handstrap on the camera helps add a little more security to carrying a cam with a 70-200 lens...

i love my handstrap, a hand strap and vertical batt grip were the first things i bought for my 20d since i had them on my 10d as well

[DionM]

one thing to consider... instead of getting a 400 f5.6 i see alot of people getting the 300 f4 and using the 1.4x converter to make it a 420 f5.6 with autofocus.

i hear the 300 f4 lens produces much better images than the 400 f5.6 plus u get extra flexibility since u can also shoot at 300mm at f4!!!

i think this may be something to consider... i know i have. if i were to choose a longer lens than my 70-200 it would be the 300 f4

True. I have thought of that. Anyway, that's a separate thread I guess ... I guess I was just saying that I'm not worried about pack weight (as I will have 'everything in there') but just weight on the cam.

[DocFrankenstein]

I can only talk about sigma. It is heavy.

It does not weigh that much, but it gets uncomfortable fast. Especially zooming in-out in vertical position, the hands get tired fast and it starts to shake.

I want to add a grip on my rebel because of this, to counter balance the weight of the lens.

and I'm not too small 6'0 225 pounds 13 inch wrists