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 21 Feb 2014 (Friday) 01:00
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Considering the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

 
Ken ­ Nielsen
Goldmember
1,510 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Portland OR
     
Feb 21, 2014 01:00 |  #1

I have just let go of my 500mm f/4 as I'm pretty much done with birding, but the need for reach is always something that would be nice for a walk-about lens. I have the 24-70 now using with my D1 MK IV is a good match. My questions are, Is the image quality going to be top of the line like the 24-70 is? and the other question: Is it 2.8 throughout the 70 to 200 or does it drop off as you go to the greater focal lengths?

I have a carbon fibre tripod which should be good enough for this shorter focal length, but also, wanted to know how good this lens is and is it light enough for steady and experienced hand-held (I've used the 500 f/4 hand held for short 'bird overhead' shots and it worked well.)

Any exceptional shots that prove this lens's worth would also be appreciated. I am shooting mainly live action of my dogs at play lately. This is my main focus.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
basketballfreak6
Goldmember
1,449 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 2650
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 21, 2014 01:41 |  #2

Ken Nielsen wrote in post #16705715 (external link)
I have just let go of my 500mm f/4 as I'm pretty much done with birding, but the need for reach is always something that would be nice for a walk-about lens. I have the 24-70 now using with my D1 MK IV is a good match. My questions are, Is the image quality going to be top of the line like the 24-70 is? and the other question: Is it 2.8 throughout the 70 to 200 or does it drop off as you go to the greater focal lengths?

I have a carbon fibre tripod which should be good enough for this shorter focal length, but also, wanted to know how good this lens is and is it light enough for steady and experienced hand-held (I've used the 500 f/4 hand held for short 'bird overhead' shots and it worked well.)

Any exceptional shots that prove this lens's worth would also be appreciated. I am shooting mainly live action of my dogs at play lately. This is my main focus.

hey Ken, i personally find the 70-200 II to be excellent, really love it on my 5d3, auto focus is fantastic, i find it to be sharp across the zoom range wide open, but i do notice that at/near minimum focus distance sharpness suffers by mid-frame during testing (centre still very sharp), i compared my lens against 2 other copies and found it to be the same, tho real world usage i doubt you'll notice

it does have a bit of weight to it, but i can still get sharp shots shooting at 200mm and below 1/50 shutter speed fairly comfortably with the IS (and i ain't strong by any means lol)

these are far from exceptional, but hopefully gives you some idea what it is capable of:

IMAGE: https://v4s.yimg.com/sj/2880/11082280665_067426c3ee_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/11​082280665/  (external link)
Martin (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://v4s.yimg.com/sk/3709/12560588575_964f30a347_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/12​560588575/  (external link)
Roar vs Jets (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5503/12669806643_6c52e72d84_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/12​669806643/  (external link)
rainbow lorikeet (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://s3.yimg.com/so/7289/11082385913_c346458e82_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/11​082385913/  (external link)
Urangan Pier (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2855/11082232525_021e855d03_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/11​082232525/  (external link)
Osprey (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://v4s.yimg.com/so/7301/9590961454_a49565e5c1_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …ketballfreak6/9​590961454/  (external link)
wallaby (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

https://www.instagram.​com/tony.liu.photograp​hy/ (external link)
flickr (external link)
https://500px.com/tony​_liu_photography (external link)
5DIV, 5DIII, modified 760D, 16-35L f/4 IS, 24-70L II f/2.8, 70-200L IS II f/2.8, S150-600 f/5-6.3 SPORT, S14 f/1.8 ART, S50 f/1.4 ART, S135 f/1.8 ART, 100L IS Macro f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
the ­ flying ­ moose
Goldmember
1,639 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Dec 2006
     
Feb 21, 2014 01:52 |  #3

I would have no qualms about picking up that lens if I were you. I've only had it a short time and I'm already blown away by it. It will be a great match to your 1dmk4.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,427 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Likes: 3910
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Feb 21, 2014 01:58 |  #4

Fantastic lens! I have both the 24-70 II and the 70-200 II and they are both in a league of their own. I would see no reason to hesitate if you can afford it.


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick_Reading.UK
Senior Member
Avatar
836 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK
     
Feb 21, 2014 02:07 |  #5

I agree.. The 70-200 2.8 mk2 is the Dogs Bollocks !!


EOS 5Dmk3 X2, 60D, EF24-70mm f2.8L mk2, EF70-200mm f2.8L IS mk2, EF85mm f1.8, EF50mm f1.4, EF50mm f1.8 mk1(350D with 18-55mm Sh"kit" lens).
Speedlite 600EX-RT, 430EX II Flash. manfrotto 190XDB tripod, Giottos GTMML 3290B Monopod, B+W 77mm 110 Single Coated filter, Hama 77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,283 posts
Gallery: 1696 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10665
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Feb 21, 2014 02:15 |  #6

Ken Nielsen wrote in post #16705715 (external link)
I have just let go of my 500mm f/4 as I'm pretty much done with birding, but the need for reach is always something that would be nice for a walk-about lens. I have the 24-70 now using with my D1 MK IV is a good match. My questions are, Is the image quality going to be top of the line like the 24-70 is? and the other question: Is it 2.8 throughout the 70 to 200 or does it drop off as you go to the greater focal lengths?

I have a carbon fibre tripod which should be good enough for this shorter focal length, but also, wanted to know how good this lens is and is it light enough for steady and experienced hand-held (I've used the 500 f/4 hand held for short 'bird overhead' shots and it worked well.)

Any exceptional shots that prove this lens's worth would also be appreciated. I am shooting mainly live action of my dogs at play lately. This is my main focus.

I would imagine someone spending this kind of cash, and coming from a 500mm F4L, 1D4, Carbon fibre tripods, etc, would probably do basic research to know whether the lens is constant aperture or not, at the very least. Let alone look through the lens archive thread, or search threads, concerning this particular lens.

It's pretty much the best zoom Canon produces currently. Not even arguably.

Is this thread for real?

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,427 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Likes: 3910
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Feb 21, 2014 02:22 |  #7

Lol... I missed that part!


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Feb 21, 2014 06:49 |  #8

The 70-200 II is an amazing optic... Extremely sharp from one end to the other. Depending on the copy, you can get some variation from one end to another. I have had quite a few and the variation can be quite a bit. Some are sharper at 70mm, others at 200mm... Some can be more balanced but not as high on either end or if your lucky, both ends extremely sharp (my current copy, but I have had almost all the combinations above! :D )

But overall, I never had a soft one by any means... Even the "bad" performers are extremely sharp, it is just when comparing side by side do you really notice! So I would not worry! :D Overall, performance is excellent with all of them.

IMO, the image quality of the 70-200 II just slightly tops the 24-70 II... But it is hard to say if it really is, or just due to the more interesting focal length. Either way, it is easily one of Canon's most impressive zooms.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GuitarDTO
Goldmember
1,857 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 474
Joined Jul 2012
     
Feb 21, 2014 10:48 |  #9

I love my 70-200 2.8ii, but it's a monster for walk-about use. I still do it, but there are times I wish I would have gotten the F4 IS version instead. From what I understand the image quality on both is fantastic.


Gear: 5D3, 135L, Sigma 35, 50 1.8 STM, 16-35 F/4L IS, 85/1.8, Fujifilm X100T
Flickr: DavioTheOne (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RogerC11
Senior Member
467 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
     
Feb 21, 2014 13:47 |  #10

MalVeauX wrote in post #16705807 (external link)
I would imagine someone spending this kind of cash, and coming from a 500mm F4L, 1D4, Carbon fibre tripods, etc, would probably do basic research to know whether the lens is constant aperture or not, at the very least. Let alone look through the lens archive thread, or search threads, concerning this particular lens.

It's pretty much the best zoom Canon produces currently. Not even arguably.

Is this thread for real?

Very best,

It could be arguable that the 200-400mm is actually Canon's best zoom currently in production.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Milutiche
Senior Member
Avatar
819 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 260
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Whangarei, New Zealand
     
Feb 21, 2014 13:59 |  #11

I've had the 70-200 f2.8 is mk2 for about a year and I love it to bits, upgraded from the 100-400 and although I lost range, what I picked up in image quality more than made up for it, I hardly ever used it on a tripod as the IS is awesome.


www.actionimages.net.n​z
Gear List
Sports Photos on Facebook (external link)
Sports Photos on Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick5
Goldmember
Avatar
3,109 posts
Likes: 197
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
     
Feb 21, 2014 16:21 |  #12

Have had the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II for three years now. Simply my best.


Canon 5D Mark III (x2), BG-E11 Grips, 7D (x2) BG-E7 Grips, Canon Lenses 16-35 f/4 L IS, 17-40 f/4 L, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 70-200 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/4 L IS Version II, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS Version II, TS-E 24 f/3.5 L II, 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS, 10-22 f3.5-4.5, 17-55 f/2.8 L IS, 85 f/1.8, Canon 1.4 Extender III, 5 Canon 600 EX-RT, 2 Canon ST-E3 Transmitters, Canon Pixma PRO-10 Printer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ken ­ Nielsen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,510 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Portland OR
     
Feb 21, 2014 21:12 |  #13

basketballfreak6 wrote in post #16705766 (external link)
hey Ken, i personally find the 70-200 II to be excellent, really love it on my 5d3, auto focus is fantastic, i find it to be sharp across the zoom range wide open, but i do notice that at/near minimum focus distance sharpness suffers by mid-frame during testing (centre still very sharp), i compared my lens against 2 other copies and found it to be the same, tho real world usage i doubt you'll notice

it does have a bit of weight to it, but i can still get sharp shots shooting at 200mm and below 1/50 shutter speed fairly comfortably with the IS (and i ain't strong by any means lol)

these are far from exceptional, but hopefully gives you some idea what it is capable of:

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/11​082280665/  (external link)
Martin (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/12​560588575/  (external link)
Roar vs Jets (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/12​669806643/  (external link)
rainbow lorikeet (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/11​082385913/  (external link)
Urangan Pier (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com …etballfreak6/11​082232525/ (external link)
Osprey (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com …ketballfreak6/9​590961454/ (external link)
wallaby (external link) by basketballfreak6 (external link), on Flickr

Can't argue with the results you've posted here, fantastic shots and beautiful work on all of these.

I'm sold but still the remaining question I don't think I would have to dig for the answer somewhere other than my best help on the internet which is the great people here on the Canon Forums. Is the lens 2.8 throughout the zoom range?

I figured that you who own this lens would have the best information as you are living with this lens and the truest answers come from those with the experience of actually owning this lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
the ­ flying ­ moose
Goldmember
1,639 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Dec 2006
     
Feb 21, 2014 21:14 |  #14

Ken Nielsen wrote in post #16707918 (external link)
Is the lens 2.8 throughout the zoom range?

Yes.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ken ­ Nielsen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,510 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Portland OR
     
Feb 21, 2014 21:19 |  #15

the flying moose wrote in post #16707924 (external link)
Yes.

You are a true gentleman and a scholar.

Thank You. Internet shows that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM is constant aperture so it makes sense that the IS II is also.




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

2,307 views & 0 likes for this thread
Considering the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
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 armychemical
627 guests, 212 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.