L Goodness - but is the camera okay?

pearce_jj

pearce_jj

Messages
1,854
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening all :wave:

Very chuffed to have gotten my hands on the 70-200 F2.8L :cool: but it does seem a bit of a tank.

Is it really okay to leave this on the camera with the whole thing dangling around my neck, not for my neck but are the camera strap and lens mounts up to that?

Thanks!

http://sittingbourneSPAMerver.com/downloads/photos/tp_shared/70-200/f2.8.jpg
 
Should be fine. I never had any trouble. 300/2.8 or 500/4 have straps to mount to the lenses but the 70-200 doesn't so presume Canon think its ok as well
 
Wel I spent all day at Leuchars with my 100-400 hanging off my 40D. Only harm was a sore neck!
 
That is one cracking lens there mate... I have had the pleasure of using one for a short period and is a stunning bit of kit. Can't wait to see what you get with it..
 
Tank? more like a Jumbo jet!!
 
it's what every working photographer does, day in, day out.... will be fine :) these things are built pretty damn well :)
 
i know what you mean and after 2 years on a 40D mine hasn't fallen off yet.
If i'm waling far i tuck the collar mount into my arse pocket or trouser waist band /belt and if i'm running i cradle that baby :D

and congrats it's a great bit of kit ;)
 
Come to think of it, I remember seeing a local press photographer last year.. his kit was 2x 5Ds, one with a 24-70mm f/2.8, the other with a 70-200mm f/2.8, both slung over his shoulder.

I'm guessing he went out every day with them like that ;)

A.
 
Last year we had a customer sling her camera over her shoulder with one of our Canon 500s attached, and she wasn't using the strap attached to the 500 - just the camera strap. That meant that all the weight of the 500 was hanging from the lens mount.

There wasn't a happy ending.

The 500 and 300 (and other big lenses) have carry straps for a reason. The 70-200 doesn't have one; therefore it doesn't need one.
 
StewartR said:
Last year we had a customer sling her camera over her shoulder with one of our Canon 500s attached, and she wasn't using the strap attached to the 500 - just the camera strap. That meant that all the weight of the 500 was hanging from the lens mount.

There wasn't a happy ending.

The 500 and 300 (and other big lenses) have carry straps for a reason. The 70-200 doesn't have one; therefore it doesn't need one.
Click to expand...

Just read that old post- ouch!!
 
I am in two minds on the 100-400, it is probably twice the weight of the camera. I try to pick it up by the tripod mount, but keep forgetting.
 
Have to agree with the others - if Canon thought it was too heavy for the mount, then it would have come with a strap.

Having said that, I think that only applies for the metal bodied cameras - I am getting back into b&w film, and attached my tamron 70-200 f2.8 (lighter than the canon equivalent, I believe) to my old EOS 300v - it felt as though the lens was going to rip the front off my camera if I wasn't supporting it fully :bonk:
 
That lens is a heavy beast. I rented it for a week, I hang it on my left shoulder instead of the neck. Its too heavy to strap around the neck for long periods of time. Congrats on the purchase, its a fantastic lens. :cool:
 
coldpenguin said:
I am in two minds on the 100-400, it is probably twice the weight of the camera. I try to pick it up by the tripod mount, but keep forgetting.
Click to expand...

Yes I am the same just out of mechanical sympathy really!
But as has been said Canon would put a strap on the lens if it needed it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top