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 12 Jun 2010 (Saturday) 11:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 70-200 F2.8 NON IS-will I be disapointed?

 
PNPhotography
Senior Member
Avatar
802 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 55
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
Jun 12, 2010 11:05 |  #1

I see B&H has these for $1200 which is about the same price as the highly regarded 70-200 F4 IS.Im looking to upgrade my 70-300 for my 7D.I mostly shoot outdoor sports but aslo indoor Basketball which I mostly use my 85 f1.8 but it would be nice to have the 70-200 to go along with that.
I do remember reading that of all the 70-200 L's that the NON IS F2.8 is one is the softest lenses of the four. Will I reget this lens over the F4 IS one for sharpness?I can't afford the MKII but these look tempting.
Any comments from 70-200 F2.8 NON IS owners would be appreaciated
Paul


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
k4show
Goldmember
1,091 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
     
Jun 12, 2010 12:03 |  #2

Do not buy one of the 70-200Ls based on sharpness they are relatively the same. I love my 70-200 F2.8 nonis it's very sharp and I do not miss the IS, it's my favorite lens for photojournalism.


---Gear---
-----Zenfolio (external link)-----
-----Twitter------ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
george ­ m ­ w
Goldmember
Avatar
4,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
     
Jun 12, 2010 13:15 |  #3

As k4show said, the difference in sharpness between them is not enough to really even think about. If you like IS....buy that version.

Also the IS version is weather sealed where the non IS is not.
I have the non-IS and it is probably my most used lens. Excellent all the way around.


regards, george w

"It's also obvious that people determined to solve user error with more expensive equipment will graduate to expensive user error."
Dave N.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
friz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,595 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:07 |  #4

Mine is very sharp.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBrick3
Goldmember
Avatar
2,094 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: College Park, Md.
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:12 as a reply to  @ friz's post |  #5

Go for it. It's pretty hand holdable.


1D III 5D II 5D | 580 EX II x 2
17-40L | 35L | 100L | 70-200 II | 17-35 f/2.8-f/4
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:26 |  #6

My suggestion would be to go to the store and try the two lenses (f2.8 non-IS and f4 IS) on your camera before deciding. I started out with the f2.8 non-IS version (Sigma), but ended up selling it and buying the f4 IS instead. There were a couple of reasons for this. First was the weight; there's a pretty big difference between the two. I found the f2.8 very heavy to lug around for any length of time, and often left it at home just so I wouldn't have to carry it. This may not be a factor for you, but it was for me. My second problem was the lack of IS. Much of what I shoot is moving, but for the rest, my keeper rate for non-moving subjects in less than stellar light wasn't that good with the f2.8. When I got my f4 IS, the keeper rate went way up. Don't underestimate the importance of IS in a lens in this focal range.

Lastly, when I bought the f2.8, I'd thought I might use it for indoor sports, but in the end even f2.8 wasn't enough in some venues. You might want to check that out as well before choosing.

I've never regretted my decision to get rid of the f2.8 and buy the f4 IS. I get more keepers, the lens gets used ten times more frequently, and the results are just stunning. My favourite lens by far.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alainvd
Member
Avatar
200 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Brussels
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:35 |  #7

I had the 70-200 non IS and wanted to use it for wedding so mainly inside. I wasn't able to handhold it and be 100% positive that the shots I take would be sharp. I sold it and bought a 135L and never looked back at those zooms.

Now, a friend just bought the 70-200 2.8 IS II and it is a nice lens. A little bit too heavy for me though but impressive as you can shoot 200mm @ 1/20 without any issues and that is really desirable :)


5D² - 7D - 17-55 2.8 IS - 90 Macro - 35L - 85LII - 135L
Photographe de mariage en Belgique (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PNPhotography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
802 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 55
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:42 |  #8

Thanks for the advise folks.I am kinda leaning towards the F4 IS model.It's just so reliably sharp and light,I guess I'll stick to my 85 for indoor stuff.
Paul


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kinghong1970
Goldmember
Avatar
2,093 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2009
Location: NYC/NJ
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:43 |  #9

save a couple hundred more and buy a good condition 2.8 IS?


Albert the Clumsy Ape
GEAR | FEEDBACK | REVIEW | KING OF GREENE STREET (external link) | FS: Gitzo GT1550T, Photoclam PC30N

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robert7111a@yahoo.co.uk
Member
44 posts
Joined Aug 2006
     
Jun 12, 2010 14:48 as a reply to  @ ceegee's post |  #10

In a word...no

I use mine for (mainly) transport and amongst other things, the extra stop helps with the additional focus assist AF points when in servo mode. Colour is fantastic and for a zoom, it is sharp enough


robert7111a
London (UK)
Canon EOS 30D, 5D Mk 1, 5D Mk II, EF 24-105mm f4L, 70 - 200mm f4L, 70 - 200mm f2.8L, 24mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L, 135mm f2L, 100mm f2.8 macro, EF-S 17 - 85mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
george ­ m ­ w
Goldmember
Avatar
4,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
     
Jun 12, 2010 15:05 |  #11

Image Stabilization is no substitute for speed. In my opinion.


regards, george w

"It's also obvious that people determined to solve user error with more expensive equipment will graduate to expensive user error."
Dave N.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
friz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,595 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jun 12, 2010 20:54 |  #12

Took a couple at the zoo today with the 70-200 2.8 non IS @ 2.8. I think this about as sharp as it gets. No PP except to crop.

Whole picture straight from the camera.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i47.photobucket​.com …/f184/frizz1/IM​G_0982.jpg (external link)


100% Crop
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i47.photobucket​.com …f184/frizz1/IMG​_0982C.jpg (external link)



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisMc73
Goldmember
Avatar
3,212 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Edmond, OK
     
Jun 12, 2010 23:37 |  #13

I borrowed a family members 70-200 2.8 non IS, and he bought it used, all beat up, in fact I think it was dropped a few times, he got a good deal. This lens looks very rough, I was very skeptical, but I got some amazing shots, well amazing for myself anyway, so I have to say I'm very impressed with this lens. I can only imagine how a brand new one would be, or even the IS version or the new version II version...I'm very sure one of these 70-200 will be my next lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
supersportgsxr6
Member
107 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
     
Jun 13, 2010 03:36 |  #14

I was in the same boat as you a short time ago. I shoot outdoor and indoor sports, but also portraits and a few weddings a year (all for hobby, not for pay). I seriously spent a good solid month researching the different 70-200 lenses, and finally decided to spend a couple hundred more and but the Canon 70-200 2.8IS. I bought it slightly used, in fact the lens had seen less than 150 actuations and was in mint condition for just over $1500. There are decent deals out there to be had, just something to think about.

In the end it came down to the fact that I didn't want to think back and say, "I should have gotten something with IS" or "I should have gotten the faster 2.8". So I decided to knock out both.


Gear: 5dIII, 50D, 400D, Canon 18-55, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS, Canon 580 EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisMc73
Goldmember
Avatar
3,212 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Edmond, OK
     
Jun 14, 2010 11:41 |  #15

ChrisMc73 wrote in post #10351637 (external link)
I borrowed a family members 70-200 2.8 non IS, and he bought it used, all beat up, in fact I think it was dropped a few times, he got a good deal. This lens looks very rough, I was very skeptical, but I got some amazing shots, well amazing for myself anyway, so I have to say I'm very impressed with this lens. I can only imagine how a brand new one would be, or even the IS version or the new version II version...I'm very sure one of these 70-200 will be my next lens.

Just to show you what I got from a very abused version of this lens...see what you think...


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




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

15,298 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 70-200 F2.8 NON IS-will I be disapointed?
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 chopkins55
963 guests, 263 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.