Help with 70-200 F2.8

B

Ben_dc2

Messages
128
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys

Im looking at getting a Canon 70-200 F2.8 L but need a little help. (or a push in the right direction)

I cant decide if to order a new 70-200 non IS or to see if I can buy a second hand IS one.

What would you guys do ?

I have looked at the F4 IS but think i would always of wanted the extra stop. So I set on getting the F2.8.

Thanks
Ben
 
I know it's not the canon, but I have the non IS Sigma 2.8 70-200 EX and I have no issues using it without IS. IS is very nice to have but not essential!
 
Last edited:
I moved to Canon from Sony, which had in-body IS. It took me a while to get used to no-IS on my 70-200/2.8 but now high iso quality is so good it isn't a great problem to dial it up until shutter speeds are hand-holdable.

However, having then found a good deal on a 70-200/2.8 IS I wouldn't go back. It just makes every (hand-held) shot a little bit better, unkess you are at hyper high shutter speeds.

I buy all my gear second hand. Be careful who you buy from, inspect carefully and don't be afraid to walk away if you are not sure. Look at some of the second hand dealers that offer warranties if you are worried.
 
For me the IS would be worth the money if you can find it, though as always it depends on what you photograph - any sort of low light might make you wish you had IS if you go for the non IS model.
I had both the 2.8IS and the f4 IS and kept the f4 as it was so much lighter and thus easier for me to use - another thing to consider !
 
As above, depends on what you use it for. I use mine ALOT so the IS is worth it. They are a very heavy lens, the f4 felt like half the weight when I tried it.

I wouldn't mind buying second hand if the lens is looked after.
 
I have a Mk1 f2.8 with IS after previously owning a non IS f4. The IQ is excellent, and it's very sharp, even wide open at 200mm, BUT it is a heavy beast and combined with my 7D it gets tiring during a long shoot. Personally I wouldn't be without IS on longer lenses, so I'd suggest you look for decent used model.

The new f2.8 IS version is exceptional, but expensive. You should find a used Mk1 for around £900-£1000.

Steve

Sent from my iPad using TP Forums
 
Ben_dc2 said:
Cheers guys for the advice. Do you know of any good second hand retailers online ?
Click to expand...


Count me in for IS also, I shoot the nikon 70-200 VRII and really like the IS on longer focal lengths because I don't use a tripod with them usually.

2nd hand I can't help I'm afraid and you might have trouble finding a good one with IS because its the best in that zoom range and people tend to hang on to them.
 
lensflair said:
Count me in for IS also, I shoot the nikon 70-200 VRII and really like the IS on longer focal lengths because I don't use a tripod with them usually.

2nd hand I can't help I'm afraid and you might have trouble finding a good one with IS because its the best in that zoom range and people tend to hang on to them.
Click to expand...

Cheers I think im going to hang on a bit and see if i can find a mint one for sale second hand. If one doesn't crop up I will order a non IS from Digital Rev.
 
i use the non-is 70-200 f2.8. no complaints from me - i tend to use mine outside so getting a shutter speed above 1/200 is very rarely a problem and shooting too much below that isn't all that desirable anyhow for what i shoot (mainly portraits)

i'm chuffed to bits with my 70-200, my most used and favourite lens. whichever version you end up with you will surely be in for a treat.
 
cuthbert said:
i use the non-is 70-200 f2.8. no complaints from me - i tend to use mine outside so getting a shutter speed above 1/200 is very rarely a problem and shooting too much below that isn't all that desirable anyhow for what i shoot (mainly portraits)

i'm chuffed to bits with my 70-200, my most used and favourite lens. whichever version you end up with you will surely be in for a treat.
Click to expand...

Thanks

I cant wait to get one

I was shooting bike's at Cadwell park yesterday with my 17-85mm I put on my old Tamron 70-300 for 5 mins at i nearly through it across the track. I was going to sell it but I think I just might give it away it was that bad ! :lol::lol:
 
Had a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 and it was rather large and heavy, Canon equivalent is equally big and weighty, eventually settled on the f/4 is.

Extra stop wasn't that important to me, but the size and weight was, might be a good idea to have a look and see what you think.
 
im having similar thoughts with the f4 is vs non is.. i think if you have the money its deffinitely worth it.. especially if youll be working in low light.. if your outside at high shutter speeds or avec tripod, id save the cash... the f2.8 seems to be a right heffer of a lens lol!! have fun with it, id love to get my hands on one XD
 
I have the f4 IS version and its a cracking lens, pin sharp and doesn't way a ton. If you want a good used one try MPB, they advertise on the top of the classifieds page, give a 6 month warranty and by all accounts are great to deal with. Just do a search for them, loads have used them on here are have been well satisfied.
 
markmullen said:
The IS models are also weather sealed which the non-IS models are not, I don't know whether than influences your choice?
Click to expand...

Really? I Thought all L lenses were weather sealed!
 
Ben_dc2 said:
Cheers guys for the advice. Do you know of any good second hand retailers online ?
Click to expand...

Mifsuds, LCE, take your pick - or - put an ad in the wanted section here, someone may flog you one...
Remember tho that the 2.8 IS is mucho heavy.
EDIT: Just spotted your post count, the latter might not be possible yet.
 
Last edited:
I've recently moved form the f4 non IS to the f2.8 non IS so have never known what it is like to use IS. So for me being on a budget the 2.8 non IS was a nice upgrade.

However, having said that, if budget isn't a restriction I'd say have a go with the IS!
 
Cheers guys its alot to think about. Im really unsure if having IS is worth it. Im also not sure if I want to spend that kind of money on a second hand lens and just going for the non IS and getting a new one wont play on my mind. Knowing i have warranty and stuff.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Had a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 and it was rather large and heavy, Canon equivalent is equally big and weighty, eventually settled on the f/4 is.

Extra stop wasn't that important to me, but the size and weight was, might be a good idea to have a look and see what you think.
Click to expand...

Just batting ideas around...how does the IQ compare on the Sigma vs the Canon?

Thanks
 
at 200 and 2.8 even 4.0 you be provided a very narrow DOF so without IS you could be sunk. If you can, get the higher level lens you will not regret it.
 
Lol bens spamming it up!
As said I think it's whether you will benefit the is or not. There's always a tripod for low light shots
 
DucDuc said:
at 200 and 2.8 even 4.0 you be provided a very narrow DOF so without IS you could be sunk. If you can, get the higher level lens you will not regret it.
Click to expand...

Not the case at all. It's easy to shoot and get the shot at 200mm at 2.8 with no IS/OS!
 
I had exactly the same dilemma as yourself.
I decided on a Pre-Owned 70-200 2.8L IS Mk1 and am so glad I did so. I always have the IS on unless on tripod. The IS is supposed to give you the equivalent of 2 or 3 stops.
The F2.8 aperture also give much better DOF than the F4 lens.
It's heavier, but to me it's better build quality. :)
Don't end up buying one and not bring happy with it.
Good Luck, there will be a few on classifieds on here just keep watching it.
 
Oxford_Matt said:
I had exactly the same dilemma as yourself.
I decided on a Pre-Owned 70-200 2.8L IS Mk1 and am so glad I did so. I always have the IS on unless on tripod. The IS is supposed to give you the equivalent of 2 or 3 stops.
The F2.8 aperture also give much better DOF than the F4 lens.
It's heavier, but to me it's better build quality. :)
Don't end up buying one and not bring happy with it.
Good Luck, there will be a few on classifieds on here just keep watching it.
Click to expand...

Yeah this is the way i have started going. Ive spoken to my Dad who used to be a very keen photographer and he said it may be the only opportunity to get a lens like this so go for the best.

So i think im going to keep an eye out for a IS for a while.I cant see the for sale threads on here yet but im trying to contribute to the site :thumbs:
 
When I had Canon I bought the non IS 2.8. Great lens, changed it for IS within a month. Well worth it. Great lens for available light indoors. Sharp enough wide open. Hand holdable at very slow shutter speeds.
Go for it, it's much more versatile with than without.
 
Had the f4Is and regard it as a fantastic travel lens, then the f2.8 IS mk 1 and was impressed. Got the f2.8 IS mk 2 and it is a different animal.

If you can afford it you should seriously look at the mk 2.

The improved IS (4+ stops vs 2+ stops) is worth it alone IMHO. It is also a more versatile lens as the mk 1 (or at least mine) never worked well with TCs but the mk2 is stunning even with a x2 TC attached.

I know it is more expensive but IMHO worth it.

Have seen the f2.8 IS mk 2s go for ~£1450-1550 second hand. They are VERY rare though used. My advice is to save up (if required) and get this lens.

Good luck with your selection.
 
gary43 said:
Had the f4Is and regard it as a fantastic travel lens, then the f2.8 IS mk 1 and was impressed. Got the f2.8 IS mk 2 and it is a different animal.

If you can afford it you should seriously look at the mk 2.

The improved IS (4+ stops vs 2+ stops) is worth it alone IMHO. It is also a more versatile lens as the mk 1 (or at least mine) never worked well with TCs but the mk2 is stunning even with a x2 TC attached.

I know it is more expensive but IMHO worth it.

Have seen the f2.8 IS mk 2s go for ~£1450-1550 second hand. They are VERY rare though used. My advice is to save up (if required) and get this lens.

Good luck with your selection.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. Im looking out for one now. I hope I find one at a good pice as would be awesome lens to own.
 
Hi Ben

Best of luck with your search then.

FWIW, I do chop/change gear a lot to get what I want and can assure you that considering I have sold 35L, 85L, 200L, 100-400L, 135L, 24-70L, 600ISL plus some other lenses recently (I have acquired some good gear as well) but I would not consider even for a second getting rid of the 70-200 f2.8IS mkII.

To me, it is the best 70f2.8, 135f2.8 and 200f2.8 on the planet and I think that with a x2 TC it performs as well as my (excellent) 100-400L.

In short, it is A LOT of cash for a single lens but if you think of it as a replacement for a numbe of lenses the pain of paying for it goes away.

As ever, just my 2p worth.

Regards.

Gary
 
gary43 said:
Hi Ben

Best of luck with your search then.

FWIW, I do chop/change gear a lot to get what I want and can assure you that considering I have sold 35L, 85L, 200L, 100-400L, 135L, 24-70L, 600ISL plus some other lenses recently (I have acquired some good gear as well) but I would not consider even for a second getting rid of the 70-200 f2.8IS mkII.

To me, it is the best 70f2.8, 135f2.8 and 200f2.8 on the planet and I think that with a x2 TC it performs as well as my (excellent) 100-400L.

In short, it is A LOT of cash for a single lens but if you think of it as a replacement for a numbe of lenses the pain of paying for it goes away.

As ever, just my 2p worth.

Regards.

Gary
Click to expand...

Thanks alot again. I do think I'm going to go for this now. It will have to be 2nd hand but I will still have an awesome lens.

I kind of need it for the end of April so should have one soon.
 
gary43 said:
Hi Ben

Best of luck with your search then.

FWIW, I do chop/change gear a lot to get what I want and can assure you that considering I have sold 35L, 85L, 200L, 100-400L, 135L, 24-70L, 600ISL plus some other lenses recently (I have acquired some good gear as well) but I would not consider even for a second getting rid of the 70-200 f2.8IS mkII.

To me, it is the best 70f2.8, 135f2.8 and 200f2.8 on the planet and I think that with a x2 TC it performs as well as my (excellent) 100-400L.

In short, it is A LOT of cash for a single lens but if you think of it as a replacement for a numbe of lenses the pain of paying for it goes away.

As ever, just my 2p worth.

Regards.

Gary
Click to expand...

Seems like some good advice, they are a lot of money but that's to be expected for the quality, seems your not alone in rating the 2.8is mkII!
This has pretty much my mind up too, although I'll not be in a position to buy one for a while yet!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top