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 11 Aug 2016 (Thursday) 21:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Finally doing it: deciding between 70-200 f/2.8 II and f/4 IS

 
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,637 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2342
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 22, 2016 16:46 |  #76

AlanU wrote in post #18102863 (external link)
I'm not trying to force feed you Fujifilm :) Just mentioning alternatives for weight loss.

The first 1/3 of this link is my fuji x-t10 with 55-200 zoom. All of the UWA/wide angle photos was from my canon 5dmk2 w/ 16-35f/2.8mk2. The fuji took care of most of my long telephoto needs and I was not putting emphasis on super shallow dof. Last weekends epic VW event I wanted to capture the moment unlike posed photos. This is where I surprised myself in how my feather weight Fuji was amazing.

To be honest i did pull out my 5d3/70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 combo because of an impromptu "recently married" couples portrait photo.....as I was documenting the VW show in Vancouver's gorgeous falsecreek area. The Canon is still my comfort go to system for serious sessions.

http://www.alanuyenoph​otography.com/p3902000​54 (external link)

I'm afraid to link this page because I uploaded long edge 2048 to down res the files to my website (speed up upload transfer). IQ wise the 55-200 can provide nice IQ like my previous Canon 70-200 f/2.8IS mk1 (minus the shallower dof). Yesterday's (last weekends) As I documented 2 days with the Fuji body I was very impressed with the "cheaper" long telephoto lens. As a matter of fact if I compare IQ of my 5dmk2 w/ 100-400L mk1 I'd take a shorter 55-200 fuji combo with no regrets. The Fuji lush/rich sharp images would destroy my perfect 100-400L mk1 copy by a huge margin.

The 55-200 is a ballpark of 82-300mm if you compare it to FF.

If I knew how to upload uncompressed images onto this site I'll post some examples.

Might want to calibrate your monitor.


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
dochollidayda
Goldmember
1,129 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2067
Joined Aug 2012
Post edited over 1 year ago by dochollidayda. (2 edits in all)
     
Aug 22, 2016 18:15 |  #77

As good as the 70-200 MK II is, its weight has never been able to justify its need in my kit. I am not a PRO or even a skilled photographer, for what I do 70-200 F4L IS has never let me down. If the MKII was 20-30% heavier, I'd definitely drop the F4LIS for it, its whopping double. My whole kit weighs less than that lens alone.

Sometimes I browse through the 70-200 MK II thread and all I see is photos of babies, fresh fruit and cats :D Don't get me wrong, but I rarely see something that makes my jaw drop in awe. I wonder how many people have that lens simply due to its reputation and don't have the need or skill to use it properly.

Good for them I guess...

To each their own. Have fun while at it everyone, that's the most important part of photography.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,637 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2342
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 22, 2016 18:43 |  #78

For me it was an easy choice. Own both... or own both. Also if it meant I had to have the F4 IS in order to keep the 200 F2 well then consider it done. bye bye 2.8


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mwsilver
Goldmember
3,738 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 353
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Central New Jersey
     
Aug 22, 2016 19:51 |  #79

mike_d wrote in post #18102831 (external link)
I think its more like 1/3rd the weight.

The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II weighs 1490g
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM weighs 760g

The f/4 version is 51% of the weight of the f/2.8 version, very slightly more than half.


Mark
Canon 7D2, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM, Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, DXO PhotoLab, Elements 15

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,461 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Aug 22, 2016 23:22 |  #80

Talley wrote in post #18103009 (external link)
Might want to calibrate your monitor.

My monitor is calibrated! My professional photo lab uses a Noritsu wet lab and my monitor at home virtually has identical colours when I print.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,461 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Aug 22, 2016 23:40 |  #81

Talley wrote in post #18103120 (external link)
For me it was an easy choice. Own both... or own both. Also if it meant I had to have the F4 IS in order to keep the 200 F2 well then consider it done. bye bye 2.8

I think your missing the point of the 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2. Versatility wins over a prime in many cases in real life run/gun situations.

Certainly the 200 f/2IS is nice but if your doing a static/slow moving portrait session the 200 f/2IS is great as you yell 50+ feet away from your subjects on a consistent basis. My 70-200 mk2 is a great tool especially when I'm doing a family session. If you have a space limitation in a beautiful location I've had to go on the wider end of the 70-200 or I'd fall off a nature trail/edge or hit a wall/rock face. This is where having a long prime would prevent you from getting some photographic opportunities.

Talley you've expressed your camera gear application for family non professional documentation etc..... When I shoot semi-professionally I leave gear talk aside and must deliver results with absolutely no excuses. For family documentation or serious critical photos as I run/gun I'd take high quality prime like quality in a versatile zoom. Depending on the situation I'll sometimes use my primes etc. It all depends on the situation.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,461 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Aug 23, 2016 01:26 |  #82

Charlie wrote in post #18102950 (external link)
If he wants to lose some weight, Sony is the way not fuji  :p

70-300G > 55-200
low/high ISO > 5D3 > fuji
AF > Fuji, however fuji may have caught up
IBIS > nothing for lowlight
Eye AF > all
Can use canon lenses with good AF in a pinch.

The Sony A7mk2 would be a relatively affordable FF small bodied camera.

Charlie I'm still a wussy :) I can't drop all of my Canon line to go Sony. To get top notch IQ I'd need to go higher end sony f/2.8 zoom$$$$$

I need to buy a Fuji X-T2 before I make a final decision on sticking with Fuji. So far my 7 and 9 yrs old daughters love using my fuji bodies so I know I'm sticking with fuji in my household :)


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick5
Goldmember
Avatar
2,970 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
     
Aug 23, 2016 04:53 |  #83

Something tells me Michael is going to "Buy Twice"...............


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, 24-105 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 70-200 f/4 L IS, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS, 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, 50 f/1.4, 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
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,637 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2342
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 23, 2016 06:08 |  #84

AlanU wrote in post #18103322 (external link)
My monitor is calibrated! My professional photo lab uses a Noritsu wet lab and my monitor at home virtually has identical colours when I print.

Ah gotcha. Maybe it's my calibrated monitor then, seems like there was alot more brightness on your photos of that car event. I need to recheck mine tonight then.


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,637 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2342
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Aug 23, 2016 06:09 |  #85

AlanU wrote in post #18103332 (external link)
I think your missing the point of the 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2. Versatility wins over a prime in many cases in real life run/gun situations.

Certainly the 200 f/2IS is nice but if your doing a static/slow moving portrait session the 200 f/2IS is great as you yell 50+ feet away from your subjects on a consistent basis. My 70-200 mk2 is a great tool especially when I'm doing a family session. If you have a space limitation in a beautiful location I've had to go on the wider end of the 70-200 or I'd fall off a nature trail/edge or hit a wall/rock face. This is where having a long prime would prevent you from getting some photographic opportunities.

Talley you've expressed your camera gear application for family non professional documentation etc..... When I shoot semi-professionally I leave gear talk aside and must deliver results with absolutely no excuses. For family documentation or serious critical photos as I run/gun I'd take high quality prime like quality in a versatile zoom. Depending on the situation I'll sometimes use my primes etc. It all depends on the situation.

I get it. The 70-200 comes out for birthdays and such or when I do portraits and don't want to mess with swapping lenses the 70-200 does great.


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MatthewK
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,034 posts
Gallery: 480 photos
Likes: 6426
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
     
Aug 23, 2016 07:14 |  #86

Nick5 wrote in post #18103458 (external link)
Something tells me Michael is going to "Buy Twice"...............

You're probably right, considering that in the past I have purchased/sold a 24-70 variant 4 times now :oops:


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4920
Joined Sep 2007
     
Aug 23, 2016 08:23 |  #87

AlanU wrote in post #18103391 (external link)
The Sony A7mk2 would be a relatively affordable FF small bodied camera.

Charlie I'm still a wussy :) I can't drop all of my Canon line to go Sony. To get top notch IQ I'd need to go higher end sony f/2.8 zoom$$$$$

I need to buy a Fuji X-T2 before I make a final decision on sticking with Fuji. So far my 7 and 9 yrs old daughters love using my fuji bodies so I know I'm sticking with fuji in my household :)

That's why Sony is totally awesome, you don't have to go all in, body + metabones + 1 native cheap lens like the FE 50/1.8 to get your feet wet, they don't force you to switch. Pretty much any canon lens will AF and track with Sony, native lens will get you even more abilities like eye focus, lock on AF. G lenses have a custom button on the lenses for additional mapping.

High end 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 85 f1.4, yup, Sony has it. Small lightweight lenses? Plenty of those too. Only thing is the price, being fairly new, it's expensive. In a few years, I imagine prices will fall just like canon stuff. They already have on their older lenses.

It's great having just one system to deal with, so simple. I can do small, I can match big, best of both worlds.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
6,461 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 572
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Post edited over 1 year ago by AlanU.
     
Aug 23, 2016 08:39 |  #88

Talley wrote in post #18103487 (external link)
Ah gotcha. Maybe it's my calibrated monitor then, seems like there was alot more brightness on your photos of that car event. I need to recheck mine tonight then.

No your correct....some photos are on the hotter side of exposure. I'm the official photographer for this event but also overly generous pro bono as a club member. Maybe around 1700 photos reduced to a smaller number as I post process. Sucks to shoot close to 10hrs (x2) then post process for the local / world viewing of my images to get a feel of the show. Man if I only had to edit a couple hundred I'd have more luxury of time to edit ...but sadly I do not.

Early day lighting also may be on the accurate cooler side of the kelvin.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 50-140 | TT685
Sony A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,511 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Aug 24, 2016 21:52 |  #89

I have a unique set up for the 200mm focal length. I have the 70-200mm f4 IS, and also the 200mm 2.8 prime. For general shooting I'll take the zoom. For sports, low light activities, and beautiful bokeh, I'll grab the prime (which is a whole lot smaller & lighter than the 2.8 zoom).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
Avatar
3,089 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 118
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Aug 25, 2016 18:01 |  #90

nightcat wrote in post #18105236 (external link)
I have a unique set up for the 200mm focal length. I have the 70-200mm f4 IS, and also the 200mm 2.8 prime. For general shooting I'll take the zoom. For sports, low light activities, and beautiful bokeh, I'll grab the prime (which is a whole lot smaller & lighter than the 2.8 zoom).

Actually, I think this is a great strategy. Have smaller f/4 zooms and complement them with primes where needed. I have the 200mm f/2.8 and love it.




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

11,050 views & 29 likes for this thread
Finally doing it: deciding between 70-200 f/2.8 II and f/4 IS
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 suitman1
379 guests, 277 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.