Canon 70-200 2.8 IS weight

When referring to the weight of you lens or gear in general I think you should consider the actual weight, in this case 3.5lb. Using just the words "its heavy or its not that heavy " in general could mean anything.
This way you don't have to buy the lens just to see how heavy or light it may or may not be.
Just a thought

I would call it "stocky" but after carrying it around all day...it certainly makes a lot of the other lenses feel lighter.

I have this lens mounted on my 350D and it does feel a bit heavy, but i get used to it. Makes everything feel like air.

Less than 3 pounds. Are you a man or a mouse?

I cannot wait to get my 70-200 f2.8IS, and I don't care how much it weigh's. if I am going to spend £1200 all I really want is the increase in quality, so I am prepared to put up with a little more weight .

I have the Lowepro Stealth Reporter 200AW bag and normally the 70-200 2.8 IS is NOT in the bag due to the weight.

The 17-55 2.8 IS is on the camera, 10-22 and 50 1.8 as well as the 580EX along with some odds and ends are always in the bag. I'll trade the 50 for the 70-200 when there is a chance I will need it.

A lot of the time I will switch between the 17-55 and 70-200 for a family or indoor event.

If I am shooting outdoors and plan on long range shots I will use a monopod, put EVERYTHING in the back of the SUV and change between the 70-200, Bigma and the 10-22.

When using the monopod I still have the weight to carry around but don't have to support the weight of the lens while I am composing and shooting.

All that being said, I have had an XT till I sold it recently. The 40D comes tomorrow and I expect an increase in size and weight so things may change a bit but I think I will continue to use the monopod in a similar way.

I realy think the weight of it is very handyif someone tries to steal it you can club them to death with it and cary on shooting.

I've been using the 70-200/2.8 IS for over five years and I love it. It's a real workhorse lens.

A couple suggestions...

If still using the Canon strap that came with your camera, replace it with an Op-Tech or other that's wider, "springier" and a lot kinder to your shoulder.

If the white color of the lens bothers you (and/or your subjects) there are neoprene covers available. One brand is "Lens Coats". Last time I looked, Adorama, www.rue.com and www.birdsasart.com and others sell them. I've seen several camo versions, as well as basic black. An added benefit, the lens will be padded against moderate bumps to it's barrel.

malla1962 wrote in post #4251342
I realy think the weight of it is very handyif someone tries to steal it you can club them to death with it and cary on shooting.

I agree. I certainly wouldn't want to take a good whack from it.

amfoto1 wrote in post #4252666
...If still using the Canon strap that came with your camera, replace it with an Op-Tech or other that's wider, "springier" and a lot kinder to your shoulder...

The only thing I would add is get the POTN OpTech strap and support this board.

I have a wrist injury which makes it painful to hold a lens like the 70-200 F2.9 continually. Thus I will get a 70-200 f4 IS when I feel I wish to upgrade from my 70-300 IS.

Tom_D wrote in post #4250263
I have the Lowepro Stealth Reporter 200AW bag and normally the 70-200 2.8 IS is NOT in the bag due to the weight.

Ditto - I was the same. It's not the weight of 1 lens that is the issue. For me it was the combined weight of the 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 f/2.8 + all the other junk/flashes/teleconve​rters etc that I'd lug around. It got to the point that I was either always leaving the 70-200 f/2.8 lens out of the bag or leaving the bag behind altogether.

The best lens for a camera, is one that you have with you...

Its a great lens, and you will be happy with it. I thought it was heavy when I first used one and it was. Then last weekend I handheld a 400 2.8 for a while and that was HEAVY! I now appreciate the weight of the 70-200 2.8.