Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Feb 2012 (Thursday) 06:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Does 70-200 2.8 II answers all !!

 
KinoC
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 14
Joined Jun 2009
Location: South Florida
     
Feb 23, 2012 12:14 |  #16

The 70-200MII is favorite lens and based on sharpness it can replace all of those you mention. I campared the 85L to GreatWhite@85 (both @ F2.8)under the same light condition and they where almost equal in sharpness (GreatWhite slightly better) but the bokeh of 85L is superior and it has an edge in the way color pops out. The 135L has the bokeh that's it. I don't have a 100L so I can't comment on that one.


KC
1Dx |5D MII | 7D|16-35 MII|24-70 MII|70-200 MII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 132
Joined Dec 2010
     
Feb 23, 2012 12:19 |  #17

Enjoy that lens, it's one of the really good ones.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gocolts
Goldmember
1,246 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2010
     
Feb 23, 2012 12:20 |  #18

Short answer- Yes.

And, assuming you aren't a pixel peeper, it'll also replace a 300mm f/4L, 70-300L and a 100-400L if you have some TC's. I compared it back to back with a 100-400 and decided I didn't need the 100-400.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
noisejammer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,053 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto ON
     
Feb 23, 2012 13:04 |  #19

I tried it in a careful test against a couple of primes

100/2 MP... well it's not fair to compare it with the world's best 100mm.... but it's still respectable.
100/2.8L ... the macro lens is sharper at f/2.8
135/2L ... the prime is marginally sharper at f/2.8 but the prime has better bokeh
200/2.8L... the zoom is considerably sharper at all stops.
300/4L .... the prime is marginally sharper than the zoom with a 1.4 II but its IS is not even close.

I had no qualms when I ditched the 135L, 200L and 300L. I kept the Zeiss.

Like all things, you can destroy them through abuse or they can fail on their own. Once a lens makes it through the first couple of thousand frames, it is unlikely to break. The same is true of the 70-200 II.... so if you buy one, use it.


Several cameras and more glass than I will admit to.
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Feb 23, 2012 13:07 |  #20

noisejammer wrote in post #13952198 (external link)
100/2 MP... well it's not fair to compare it with the world's best 100mm.... but it's still respectable.

I'm pretty sure he means the canon 100/2, not the zeiss.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
photohistorian
Senior Member
Avatar
536 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Elyria, Ohio
     
Feb 23, 2012 13:50 |  #21

Sirrith wrote in post #13950925 (external link)
Lick it, go on. You know you want to :lol:

congrats on the new toy.


You know it! Thanks!

MT Stringer wrote in post #13951212 (external link)
Chuck Norris approves the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM! ;)

So does Clint Eastwood!

sandeep9868 wrote in post #13951799 (external link)
Of all, this rocks :)

Good one !!


Congrats :)

Actually my question is about simple lens not considered L though.
85 f1.8 @ $400
135 f2 @ $1000
100 f2 @ $470
200 f2 @ $800
& only one 70-200 f2.8 MKII @ $2250
apart from that i believe you can save upon 50 1.4 as well.

Thanks Pete. I say buy it! If you have the cabbage of course! I do not think the primes are losing their job anytime soon, but the 70-200 2.8 II is a value packed lens, hence the reason why I bought it. Also, it must be noted that it replaces a 70-300 IS USM and I have a 1.4 teleconverter to go with it.

The deciding factor is my decision to transition to a 5D MK II or equivalent in the future, but not the near future. I want quality glass before I move to a 35mm sensor. Obviously, one does not need a pro body to utilize quality glass.

Also, sorry for hijacking your thread. :oops:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
photohistorian
Senior Member
Avatar
536 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Elyria, Ohio
     
Feb 23, 2012 13:54 |  #22

rick_reno wrote in post #13951904 (external link)
Enjoy that lens, it's one of the really good ones.

I assume you are referring to me, Thanks Dude! I plan to wear the metal connector 'all the way down'. :cool:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jayadeff
Senior Member
367 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Salinas, CA
     
Feb 23, 2012 14:34 |  #23

It is a fantastic lens. It certainly answers all the criticisms of the earlier versions. It's very sharp even wide open at 200mm (which the old one was not). I have also found, similarly to others, that it really comes alive when you mount it on a newer body like the 1DMkIV or 7D.

I still keep my 200 2.8L II for when I don't need zoom or IS, and I want a lighter lens. And, I keep my 100mm f/2 EF for portraits and wedding work because I like the shallow depth of field that f/2.8 doesn't quite give me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandeep9868
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
106 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Feb 23, 2012 20:51 |  #24

I had no qualms when I ditched the 135L, 200L and 300L. I kept the Zeiss.

I'm referring to canon, zeiss...uff used once, its insanely sharp but not dare to buy one at that price (at least as for now).

Hmm well i'm looking to 70-200 deals, hope to buy one soon:).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Feb 23, 2012 21:52 |  #25

There is nothing to fault with the IQ of the 70-200. I think that says it all.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raydius
Member
77 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Feb 24, 2012 02:48 as a reply to  @ bohdank's post |  #26

I might be one of the few people who is going the other direction. I had mine since 2010 and even used it with e 2x TC for a while, but in the end because I'm not a professional photographer, not only was the ideal focal range compromised by my crop body (7D), it was difficult finding scenarios where I wanted to bring along the extra size and weight (I actually had to buy a whole new camera bag to accomodate this lens). And good luck bringing it out in public for street candids without getting the paparazzi comment, or parents hiding their children, etc. Even if positive, unless you are at a sports event where everyone has one, you will always get SOME kind of comment just by taking it out.

Yes the IQ, focus speed, IS, etc is everything that everyone says. But none of that matters if you leave it at home or in your bag. I'm personally looking forward to going to primes so I can not kill my wrist/forearm walking around or feel like I need a flash every time the light isn't perfect. Have already borrowed the 85 and am satisfied both with the performance as well as having an extra $2k in my pocket.

I wasn't into birding previously but I was forcing myself to get into it to justify the cost of the gear, which IMO isn't a healthy way to go about the hobby, so I guess my 2 cents especially to the hobbyist is that it depends on whether you think you will actually use this lens and get your money's worth.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phobosx13x
Member
70 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:21 |  #27

Raydius wrote in post #13957113 (external link)
And good luck bringing it out in public for street candids without getting the paparazzi comment, or parents hiding their children, etc. Even if positive, unless you are at a sports event where everyone has one, you will always get SOME kind of comment just by taking it out.

I use mine all the time, and this part is fairly accurate. Most of the time people just say something inane like "cool camera" or whatever. I don't mind it usually. Just say thanks, smile and go about your business. But yeah, you can forget being stealthy.

And yes its heavy, especially on a gripped camera like mine. But I just deal with it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
edge100
Goldmember
1,920 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:28 |  #28

Seems to be a great lens. Except at f/2. Or f/1.4. Or f/1.2, for that matter. By the same token, my 85L II sucks at 70-84mm and 86-200mm.

I value fast aperture more than the ability to zoom, but that's just me.

I could certainly see a photographer who shoots basketball carrying both a 70-200 f/2.8L IS mkII AND an 85 f/1.8.


Street and editorial photography in Toronto, Canada (external link)
Mirrorless: Fujifilm X-Pro1
Film: Leica MP | Leica M2 | CV Nokton 35/1.4 | CV Nokton 40 f/1.4 | Leitz Summitar 50 f/2 | Canon 50 f/1.2 LTM | Mamiya 7 | Mamiya 80 f/4.0 | Mamiya 150 f/4.5 | Mamiya 43 f/4.5
How to get good colour from C-41 film scans (external link)

Digitizing film with a digital camera (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pyrojim
Goldmember
1,882 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:30 as a reply to  @ Phobosx13x's post |  #29

Chuck Noris AND Jack Bauer both use a 70-200mm IS2.

The most interesting man in the world has 14 of these, 5 of which fit in his wallet.

The Old Spice Guy thinks this lens is sexy, too.

Two years after the James Webb reaches L2, NASA plans to send a replacement lens, NASA ordered a 70-200mm IS2...just incase.

.


PhaseOne H25
Camera agnostic

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tutwood
Member
96 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 18
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Scotland
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:34 |  #30

Its my goto lens 90% of the time




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,840 views & 0 likes for this thread
Does 70-200 2.8 II answers all !!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is amdcasin
1821 guests, 279 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.