Canon 70-200mm F 2.8 IS [Archive]

Cuddy

25-04-2008, 19:54

Any one got this lens, how do you feel about it. Also does anyone use it with a converter, if so i would like to hear your opinions. Or better still see your pics.

Hope if i purchase it to use it with a Canon 40D.

Regards brian.

dazzajl

25-04-2008, 19:57

Don't have one, have used one and it doesn't do it for me but it's a great recipe for some people.

It's also probably the most discussed lens on here so a search will bring up weeks worth of reading. :)

ranarama

25-04-2008, 19:59

Got it, love it and use it (sometimes with 2x converter) on a 30D. It's a hefty price tag but you won't regret spending the money.

May not be the best example in the world but here's one. EXIF embedded if you want it...

http://www.neilsampson.co.uk/images/20080326111634_pishiobury%20pingu%20v%20robins%20t opaz-1.jpg

admirable

25-04-2008, 20:14

Bought mine from Kerso, thanks, and it is a lot of money but it's a lot of lens.
I've never had a shot of an f4 but at the time the f2.8 with cashback etc was only another £200, so I went for it and do not regret it one bit.

This pic was taken on a dull wet yuck day and I'm happy with it.
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/500/IMG_8038800.jpg

oldgit

25-04-2008, 20:17

I've got one and love it. The weight doesnt bother me at all (but I am 6'3" and >16 stone). I use it with the 1.4TC quite a bit, just have to remember to stop it down a notch to f5.6 or 6.3 to get the best out of it when I do. The 2.0TC doesnt really cut it for IQ, but when you need 400mm it does the job.

If and when Dod gets around to reading this he'll tell you that the Sigma 70-200 is better, in his opinion. I dont have one having never used one, but just wanted to mention it as there are other options out there that might be worth considering.

admirable

25-04-2008, 20:18

Here's another,

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/500/Goshawk_800.jpg

Darryn

25-04-2008, 20:23

Got it, love it... use it with a 1.4xTCII and its very good. (use it with 1dmkII)

Here is a recent shot with the

1.4xTCII, at 280mm f6.3 1/160th ISO100
http://darrynreeder.com/images/FIAGT2008/LL8C6716.jpg
1.4xTCII, at 215mm f7.1 1/100th ISO 100
http://darrynreeder.com/images/FIAGT2008/TP/LL8C6774.jpg

dod

25-04-2008, 20:29

If and when Dod gets around to reading this he'll tell you that the Sigma 70-200 is better, in his opinion. I dont have one having never used one, but just wanted to mention it as there are other options out there that might be worth considering.

And the F4 is better than the Sigma :D

There's no doubt that the F2.8 and IS is an attractive package though, especially combined with the weatherproofing. The weight doesn't bother me either and I'm just average size, it's fine on the 1D with a flash all day.Best of the lot is supposed to be the F4 IS but I've not used it. The F2.8 IS isn't a bad lens but purely in my opinion it's overhyped.

Edit: just for the record here's a recent shot from it on the 1D :)

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/500/ML1W9867.jpg

AndyB

25-04-2008, 20:29

dod

25-04-2008, 20:33

IO'm glad someone else asked the question. I think a fast 70 - 200 is next on my list. ~I would like to see examples of the Sigma though to cpmpare. I am using 5D which being full frame might mean the Sigma might not be an option.

The sigma would be fine on that, I'll see if I can dig up some from the sigma as well :)

Edit: here's one, really flat light this day

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/500/ML1W5388small.jpg

and one from the Canon F4 for completeness

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/data/500/ML1W3827small.jpg

Canon Bob

25-04-2008, 21:07

I think real world images are the best way to judge but the various test charts for CA and MTF do show some differences between these two lenses.

The Canon version comes out better in the resolution stakes at f/2.8 and f/4 but then there's nothing in it after that.....the Sigmas edges are quite soft with large apertures.

The CA charts tell the opposite story and the Sigma performs quite a bit better than Canon's offering.

Vignetting is pretty much equal on both.

The decision then would really rest on what it's to be used for in the main. If wall to wall sharpness is required then it looks like Canon is the one (wildlife, indoor sports, etc)....unless the subject is likely to highlight potential CA issues (motor racing, aircraft etc) then the Sigma might be a more sensible option.

The final part of the equation is the price....?

Bob

Witch

25-04-2008, 21:19

:love::love:

Right - that's my feelings on the lens summed up then! :lol:

Seriously - take a look at my "Speedway again" thread in the motorsport sharing section - all bar the last shot taken with that lens, I use it week in, week out during the season and I know damned well that shots that aren't sharp are nothing to do with the lens - it's operator error! Yes, it's heavy - I'm only 5'1" so standing with the 30D & Grip & 70-200mm & 520EX round my neck for 2½ hours can be a bit tiring, but in all honesty it's such a joy to use you barely notice it. I've used it regularly with the 2x & 1.4x converters too - if I'm honest I only keep the 2x these days for the other half to do bird shots with when I'm using the 300 f4, but I've had some good images with the converters too. The 1.4x is invaluable, and that's even taking into account that I now have the 300mm as well!

8utters

25-04-2008, 21:25

I have the 2.8 non-IS version and absolutely love it, didn't see the point in spending over £300 for IS so got the non-IS version and haven't regreted it.

Excellent lens. I use mine with a 40D.

Hoping to get a 2x converter sometime, don't think I really need it though.

Les McLean

25-04-2008, 21:26

IO'm glad someone else asked the question. I think a fast 70 - 200 is next on my list. ~I would like to see examples of the Sigma though to cpmpare. I am using 5D which being full frame might mean the Sigma might not be an option.

I use the sigma 70-200 F2.8 with my FF 1Ds MKII, and I think it's an absolute peach of a lens, excellent with sigma 1.4 TC, but doesn't like the sigma 2.0 TC very much.

Great lens at a good price-but no IS.

pxl8

25-04-2008, 21:44

I had a f/2.8IS for 2 days this week and returned it after I discovered it was front focusing by a couple of inches when the IS was active. I can't say I was particularly impressed even ignoring the focus issue :(

whiteflyer

25-04-2008, 21:58

Love mine, I think it's my most used lens.

Canon EOS 30D, f5.0, 280mm

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q142/whiteflyer/track2.jpg

malla1962

25-04-2008, 23:19

I have one and it was my main lens once, it is superb and handles the 1.4 really well.;)

alexisonfire

26-04-2008, 01:31

englandshottest2

26-04-2008, 16:13

They look very soft for £1300ish worth of lens imo. :shrug:

ouch lol, got a point- maybe just cam shake/panning? :D

Darryn

26-04-2008, 16:23

Yup, definitely, 99% user error...

Also where do you get £1300 from? i paid much much less than that...:thinking:

CarlOgden

26-04-2008, 17:25

I think this lens is the standard sports lens, I love this lens (second to my 300 f2.8) and is a cracking lens!

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u178/CarlOgdenPhotography/Bikes/small_NV2Z0995.jpg

Carl.

Les McLean

26-04-2008, 19:10

They look very soft for £1300ish worth of lens imo. :shrug:

I think it's due to the slow(ish) shutter speed used, rather than the lens being soft

mrgubby

26-04-2008, 19:21

And a Sigma 70-200 @ 200 with a 2x TC, handheld. Focus was on the bumper area :)

EXIF in the shot

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/brian.pitblado/FIA/gt5.jpg

AliB

26-04-2008, 19:23

I very much depends on what you want to use the lens for.

I've got the Canon f4 IS and the Sigma 2.8 and I use them both for different things. For portraiture and wedding pics I'd go for the Sigma anyday. At f2.8 it is lovely.

If I want to use one at f5.6-f8 I'll use the Canon, it's a peach at that aperture.

And if I was doing weddings/sport professionally I'd sell them both and buy the Canon f2.8 IS.

Cuddy

26-04-2008, 19:33

First of all thanks everyone for your replies, and taking the time to put up some amazing photos.
As i expected loads of different viewpoints, i know some say the F4 is better and have heard support for the sigma too.

This will be a once in a life time purchase for me, so i would like to get it right. i would use this as an all purpose walkabout lens my main interests are nature, landscape and macro
i have dedicated lenses at both ends Sigma 105 macro. Canon 100-400IS and im going to buy a Siggy 10-20 for landscapes. i have plenty to chew on now.
regards brian.

alexisonfire

26-04-2008, 20:41

Yup, definitely, 99% user error...

Also where do you get £1300 from? i paid much much less than that...:thinking:

£1300 is the cheapest UK price I meant. It doesn't look like user error as everything lines up, I've got several photos at around that shutter speed with panning, some even at f/2.8 that are noticebly sharper. I'm using the sigma version.

atp_image

28-04-2008, 08:50

How would the 70-200 F2.8 L IS compare to the 70-200 F4 L non IS ?
Say on a 40D..

AliB

28-04-2008, 09:43

The 2.8 IS is going to get the low light shots that the f4 would struggle with. That's why wedding togs love them. They can get shots inside a church that they would not be able to shoot with any other lens. The IS is said to give a couple of stops extra hand held.

One of the wedding chaps here can hand hold it down to 1/60sec and if you think the normal rule of thumb is shutter speed to match focal length so 200mm should be 1/200 sec. To hand hold at 1/60 sec is impressive.

That's the kind of application that the f2.8 IS excels at.

Cuddy

29-04-2008, 18:45

Food for thought guys, i have read a report that says the F4 is is a real belter of a lens and considerably cheaper think i have got a lot of reading to do.

Darryn

29-04-2008, 21:01

Youve got me paranoid about my 70-200f2.8IS now...
Just a few others ive got online, this time not using the 1.4xTC...

http://darrynreeder.com/images/FIAGT2008/TP/LL8C7410.jpg
http://darrynreeder.com/images/FIAGT2008/TP/LL8C6831.jpg
http://darrynreeder.com/images/FIAGT2008/TP/LL8C6573.jpg

Going to have to do some static focussing checks when i get a few minutes... Im half tempted to send all my gear off for pro cleaning and calibration anyway, as now i dont have to change lenses, so i shouldnt really get more dust on the sensors.

George

29-04-2008, 21:20

Errr....if your lens is still under warranty, and you return it to Canon at Elstree, they will set it up for you, and IMHO IT'S WORTH DOING.
Sent a few of mine back recently, and doing the aliassing checks with a 1Ds mk3 on live view, found all the checks to be spot on when they had been back to Canon.

George

dod

29-04-2008, 21:33

Youve got me paranoid about my 70-200f2.8IS now...

They look about as sharp as it gets :)

englandshottest2

30-04-2008, 23:56

omg i didnt know silverjet sponsored racing :D...thats my favourite airline! lol they look sharp ....i wouldnt have thought anything to worry about ???