Which 70-200 is the best value for money

Hey, hypothetically speaking, if I was to buy a 70-200 for a bit of wedding photography which would you think would give me the best bang for my buck?

I've had 3 Canon versions of the 70-200, the first was a f4 non IS, the second was a f2.8 IS MkI and lastly the f2.8 IS MkII. I've also tried a Sigma and Tamron versions, but the Sigma wasn't the new OS version, and IMO you get what you pay for. The Canon MkII has the best IQ of the lot but obviously it's the most expensive. The f4 non IS is a cracking lens though, great IQ, sharp wide open and fast AF, so it comes down to a hypothetical budget. For me at least, the best bang for buck was the Canon f2.8 IS MkII.

The Tamron was the slowest AF of the lot and the Sigma was decent, but the OS version is supposed to be about as good as the Canon f2.8 IS MkI. For the most important shots in the world, such as weddings, the only one for me is the MkII though.

Are you asking Canon only or including 3rd party as well?

For weddings I would leave the f/4 lenses out of consideration. You'll want as much light as possible during the ceremony so f/2.8 is the way to go. I've rented the f/2.8 is ver 1 and was very happy with the results, however my sister just bought the Mk II and even at $2000 US it's worth it's weight in gold. It's just as sharp as my 85 f/1.8 at the same apertures. If I truly had a need for that lens, I would buy it in a heartbeat...luckily I can borrow it if I ever need it!

Fr weddings/paid work surely it has to be the best, not the best value for money........ F2.8 ii all the way...............

It all depends on what you have as a priority...

Do you need f2.8?

Yes:

Do you need IS?

Yes: Get a 70-200 f2.8 IS II
No: Get a 70-200 f2.8

No:

Do you need IS?

Yes: Get a 70-200 f4 IS
No: Get a 70-200 f4

For wedding f4 won't cut it. f2.8 all the way.

Milutiche wrote in post #15586105
Hey, hypothetically speaking, if I was to buy a 70-200 for a bit of wedding photography which would you think would give me the best bang for my buck?

First, you need to be aware that for a EOS EF-mount camera there are seven new lenses matching that description: Canon makes a non stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8 lens and two stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses, the Mark I and the Mark II. Then there are two Canon 70-200mm f/4 lenses, one stabilized and one non stabilized. Tamron offers a non stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8 lens and a stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. Then, Sigma sells a non stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8 lens and a stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. In addition, there's an older EF-mount Canon 80-200mm f/2.8 lens, a 14-year-old model that has some value as a used unit.

As often happens, the question has been over-simplified. If you're not aware of all of these choices you can't make a decision.

For weddings, you would require f/2.8 for the most part (all the light you can get). IS would be beneficial as well, so go for the 70-200 f/2.8 IS used for $1200 or so... Probably the best value. If you want better IQ though, it will cost around $2,000 for the Mark II.

Definitely the f/2.8 IS II

For paid wedding work I would go with the canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS II. It is without a doubt the best and if you're getting paid the client should get the best.

Now for best bang for the buck I'd say the sigma 70-200 OS. Owned it loved it and will own one again (had to sell it due to lossing my job). As a hobbiest it's an amazing lense at nearly half the price. But like I said if I was getting paid I would consider the canon mark2 to be the only option.

70-200 F2.8 IS MK2 > Sigma 70-200 F2.8 > Canon 70-200 F4 IS and non-IS

Best value would be the Sigma f/2.8 OS. Best period is what everyone else has suggested.

smorter wrote in post #15587265
Definitely the f/2.8 IS II

Yes, it's that good.

My f/2.8L IS mk1 was excellent, but my friend's mkII beats it easily, wide open. If you are being paid, buy the best. f/2.8 mk II

Best value for the money? Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC. $1500. Love it!