Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mark II

jdizzle wrote in post #10928690
This lens is heavy but, totally worth it as a walk around. Make sure you get enough protein!!

I think I need steroids (not condoning any substance abuse, just being sarky)

The sharpness, detail and colour are just mad! Unfortunately Flickr does not do these images justice.

vipergts831 wrote in post #10928733
some bicep curls wouldnt hurt either

Maybe the lens alias should be "The Gym"!

Ian.

IanW wrote in post #10930831
Maybe the lens alias should be "The Gym"!

Ian.

It takes up the luggage allowance on flights, so it stays at home when I vacation

gsspirit wrote in post #10831429
The 1.4X you loose one stop of light and the 2X you loose 2 stops of light. I have heard that it does also cause some loss of sharpness but that is just from reading threads on this forum no 1st hand knowledge. Search around it has been talked about quite a few times. Canon is releasing new versions I would wait for those although they are likely to want more for the new releases. The 1.4 is supposed to not have as much loss and most seem to find it acceptable. I want one or the other too and am just going to wait for the new releases. They are supposed to focus slower as well.

I have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS MK II and a 2x mkII extender. In real world tests, with bright light, yes you do lose a tiny amount of clarity. But on the flip side, you gain an extra 200mm on the far end of your lens. Yes you also lose two f stops, so your f/2.8 will be seen by your camera as an f/5.6. Auto focus slows down also, but it is still very accurate none the less.

This photo was taken at my local duck pond with the 70-200 @ 200mm with the 2x extender on a 400D (1.6 crop body). This means the effective focal length was 640mm (200mm x 2 x 1.6). This is not a cropped photo - it is as taken by the camera (in RAW, with a little additional sharpening in DPP).

The brown truck just delivered mine and I just opened it up!!!! Right off the bat its interesting how much more packing material Canon used to protect this one over the Mark I. I also like the new focusing ring and the new hood is weird, but much more solid!

Congrats! The hood is different but improved.

vipergts831 wrote in post #10928733
some bicep curls wouldnt hurt either

It wouldn't hurt.

thenextguy wrote in post #10928791
I've only rented a 70-200mm 2.8 before, but while the weight is somewhat annoying, what I really didn't like is the size. I like being incognito when I'm shooting. Walking around with an enormous white lens makes that kind of hard to do!

It's very hard to be incognito with this lens but, the chicks dig it!

400dabuser wrote in post #10929007
I think I need steroids (not condoning any substance abuse, just being sarky)

I just take my vitamins.

ben_r_ wrote in post #10933931
The brown truck just delivered mine and I just opened it up!!!! Right off the bat its interesting how much more packing material Canon used to protect this one over the Mark I. I also like the new focusing ring and the new hood is weird, but much more solid!

Congrats Ben! I can't wait to see some pics!

lord-muz wrote in post #10931647
I have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS MK II and a 2x mkII extender. In real world tests, with bright light, yes you do lose a tiny amount of clarity. But on the flip side, you gain an extra 200mm on the far end of your lens. Yes you also lose two f stops, so your f/2.8 will be seen by your camera as an f/5.6. Auto focus slows down also, but it is still very accurate none the less.

This photo was taken at my local duck pond with the 70-200 @ 200mm with the 2x extender on a 400D (1.6 crop body). This means the effective focal length was 640mm (200mm x 2 x 1.6). This is not a cropped photo - it is as taken by the camera (in RAW, with a little additional sharpening in DPP).

Canon 400D, 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM MK II with 2x MK II Teleconverter, 400mm (effective 640mm on 1.6 crop body), ISO 100, f/5.6, 1/200th sec

Given that this photo was taken at only 1/200th sec at effective focal length 640mm, and the camera was being hand held, the IS was really working very well! I may have got an even slightly better shot had I bumped up the ISO to 400 and increased the shutter speed. In any case, the 4-stop IS of the MK II definately did a very good job.

Obviously there will be mixed reactions. Personally I feel that the loss of quality using a teleconverter is low compared to the advantages:
1: Carry around an extra 300g of teleconverter instead of another 1.38kg of 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens
2: Using the teleconverter your 70-200 f/2.8 IS MK II becomes a 140-400 f/5.6 - really you have two totally different lenses for the price of one and a bit lenses.
3: Save over AU$1,000 on the difference in purchase price of a 2x teleconverter instead of a seperate 100-400mm L lens
4: I rarely use focal lengths above 200mm anyhow (I have a 1.6 crop body anyhow, so 200mm on my body is effectively 320mm) - if you were using this focal length all day, buy the 100-400mm lens and be done with it!

I do believe glass is more important than the camera body, and even with an entry level 400D body I can get some amazing shots with the 70-200 f/2.8L IS MK II lens.

You should wait for the new MK III extenders. I have a feeling they'll be much improved over the MK II versions in regards to AF and IQ.

jdizzle wrote in post #10934181
You should wait for the new MK III extenders. I have a feeling they'll be much improved over the MK II versions in regards to AF and IQ.

Yeah now that I have read a little about the MK III extender, (especially that they are supposedly designed for higher IQ with the 70-200 2.8 MK II) i'm sorry I didn't wait off. That's life!

lord-muz wrote in post #10934362
Yeah now that I have read a little about the MK III extender, (especially that they are supposedly designed for higher IQ with the 70-200 2.8 MK II) i'm sorry I didn't wait off. That's life!

It's cool. You can sell your MK II with little loss and buy the MK III version later.

IanW wrote in post #10930831
Maybe the lens alias should be "The Gym"!

Ian.

Good idea

jdizzle wrote in post #10934162
It wouldn't hurt.

It's very hard to be incognito with this lens but, the chicks dig it!

I just take my vitamins.

Lucky you then

Just switched to Canon and received my 7D and this lens yesterday. Didn't get a chance to play with it much outside so decided to shoot one of my anime figures. All shot @ f/2.8. So far I'm loving it!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR