canon ef 70-200mm f/2.8l is ii usm lens

nomi

nomi

Messages
27
Edit My Images
No
hi,
I am looking into buying the new canon ef 70-200mm f/2.8l is ii usm lens for outdoor and portrait photography.
there is a huge difference in price ,compared to the older model canon ef 70-200mm f/2.8l is usm..
is it worth the extra money.thankyou for reading.
I have a canon 5D mk3.
 
There is a noticeable difference between the two lenses but the older version is certainly of more than adequate quality for portraiture. If you start to look at feather detail on small birds then the later one has more tangible benefits for the price premium.

Bob
 
The Mk2 is the one to get if it's within budget, but if not, I'd prefer the Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC over the Canon Mk1, or the Canon 70-200/4 IS that is a pretty good match for the Mk2 if you can forego f/2.8, and is much lighter and cheaper.
 
Plus 1 for the f4is it's only one stop from 2.8. I have this lens it's is great it's lighter and so travels the world with me
 
Echo the sentiment that there's a fairly significant difference over the mk1, get the mk2 if budget permits.
 
A good alternative is the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 have you looked at mifsuds they do some good deals for A1 condition lens. the difference between the canon and the sigma are quite minimal.
 
This lens singlehandedly sums up "you get what you pay for"

I've hired/borrowed a lot of this range I think the Tamron is better than the Sigma but the Tamron & Sigma also suffered with lens breathing , so 200mm is more like a 170ish

With this workhorse of a lens, unless you really don't mind paying cheaper you'll always be wondering of you should of saved a little longer.

If you NEED a lens soon then like others have said Try the Tamron, if you can wait and save a little longer then the mk ii is one of the best lenses you can buy.
 
Sidney77 said:
This lens singlehandedly sums up "you get what you pay for"

I've hired/borrowed a lot of this range I think the Tamron is better than the Sigma but the Tamron & Sigma also suffered with lens breathing , so 200mm is more like a 170ish

With this workhorse of a lens, unless you really don't mind paying cheaper you'll always be wondering of you should of saved a little longer.

If you NEED a lens soon then like others have said Try the Tamron, if you can wait and save a little longer then the mk ii is one of the best lenses you can buy.
Click to expand...
Im in the saving a little longer boat!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top