Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Thinking about selling my 70-200 II
  
 
StarNut
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


scalesusa wrote:
I'd take it with you to Africa along with the 2X III. Things happen, lenses get damaged, cards fail, and so do cameras. Take the lens and use it with a backup camera. It can be vary handy to have a second camera / lens at the ready. Put a 1.4X TC on the 100-400 and leave it there, it works well.


I did take two cameras to Africa, as well as a number of lenses. But the much-loved 70-200 stayed home. And I didn't miss it.

Hence this thread.






Sep 06, 2017 at 04:51 AM
Kpjr
Online

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


I sold this exact lens a month ago because of similar issues. It was in the middle gap of my shooting preferences (too short for telephoto purposes and too long for inside picture taking).

It was a superb lens in the sense of being a lens (great optics, fast focusing) but didn't fit my needs. One other thing I didn't like was how conspicuous it is/was when in the public. A black lens would have gone unnoticed but many people would come up and pester me when I had the small white attached.

If you miss it, you can always buy it again.



Sep 06, 2017 at 01:20 PM
ggreene
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


I've switched to my 100-400mk2 for almost all my good light outdoor work. If you don't need the f2.8
for lower light then I would sell it. Why keep a rarely used lens. Plus with Nikon's new 70-200/2.8 upping the ante on Canon it would not surprise me to see a mk3 within the next year or two. Sell it now for the best return value.



Sep 06, 2017 at 04:29 PM
tiggy
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


I bought the 100-400 II rationalizing that it'd be mostly paid for by selling the 70-200 II. Then I didn't sell it.

I'd tested them directly against one another, with and without TCs. The 100-400 beat the 70-200 in everything except aperture.

I found it useful to have for the edge cases (usually under forest canopy in the evening) where the 100-400 wasn't going to work in that light.

But the lens sat and sat and sat, and it up on eBay only last week with another lens and an old body with an eye for putting that capital into a 2nd 5D Mark IV or other body.

I love that lens, except for its longish minimum focus distance and somewhat busy bokeh. Hasn't been equaled really, although the new Tamron comes pretty close.

The clincher for me in getting rid of it was the acquisition of the Sigma 135 Art. For those dark moments under canopy where I need a short telephoto, it gives me 1.3 stops of light even more than the 70-200, although not quite the reach. Putting that 135 on one body and the 100-400 on the other is a killer combination for that edge case.



Sep 07, 2017 at 01:25 AM
Robin Smith
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


Sell it. It seems you want to do this and may be looking for crowd justification and emotional support. The 70-200mm f2.8 lenses are great for event and sports indoors. If you don't shoot these kinds of things, then you are indeed probably just as well off with a 100-400mm or an f4 70-200mm variant (or fast prime 135/2, 85/1.4 etc) if you want a smaller lens sometimes. The 100-400 and 70-200 f2.8 are frequently too big for long hikes and general photography (i.e. with no particular aim in mind), in my experience.


Sep 07, 2017 at 04:29 PM
hokiejokey
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


A great lens is one that gets used, and if you never use it then get rid of it.

The question may be why you don't use it? Agree with most about good use as a portrait lens. I wonder why you don't use it at F/2.8. That shallow depth of field is useful for many things.

I don't own one but I rented one once. I agree with most that it is one of Canon's best lenses ever. So many keepers, and I'm no pro. But the 100-400ii is also a great lens. It's a good "zoo" lens.



Sep 08, 2017 at 01:38 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



cameron12x
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


At what focal length do you find yourself using the 100-400 the most?

You could sell you lens, and pickup a used 70-200mm f/4L on the cheap. Pocket the cash, and have a very fine (and lighter) lens which would open up shooting possibilities at smaller FL 70-100mm.



Sep 08, 2017 at 02:01 PM
Paul Mo
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


hokiejokey wrote:
A great lens is one that gets used...



And yet a great lens is one that's there when you need it. I use my 70-200 f2.8L IS II least often, but when it is concert season my others just won't cut it.





Sep 08, 2017 at 02:27 PM
hokiejokey
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


Paul Mo wrote:
And yet a great lens is one that's there when you need it. I use my 70-200 f2.8L IS II least often, but when it is concert season my others just won't cut it.



True. My response probably applies more to the hobbyist. Professionals can't afford not to have the right equipment for their business. Hobbyists (generally) can't afford to spend money on equipment that rarely gets used.



Sep 08, 2017 at 04:10 PM
pshyvers
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


To take a slightly different spin, what do y'all think about this-

If you've got the 400mm DO, what do you want for your tele-zoom?

- 100-400mm
- 70-200mm f/4
- 70-200mm f/2.8

Edited on Sep 08, 2017 at 04:32 PM · View previous versions



Sep 08, 2017 at 04:27 PM
StarNut
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


OP here.

I appreciate all the thoughts; it's exactly what I was looking for!

To recap (and, to some extent, repeat) what I said in the first post:

--I am not a professional; I don't "need" the wonderful lens for my work
--My kids were jocks; when my kids were in school, I used the lens to photograph them in their sports. Now they're grown, and there are not yet any grandchildren. So I haven't done this in many years.
--I have never used the lens indoors, other than photographing my kids playing volleyball and basketball.
--My principal use of the lens, other than kids' games, has always been as a landscape lens, stitching together high-resolution images. And always at f/8 or f/11. The 100-400 can do that just as well.
--I occasionally use the lens, with an extension tube, for macro photography of small beasties. That would be my principal reason for keeping the lens now (other than sentiment), if the 100-400 isn't as good at that.
--I also have, historically, used the 70-200 with a for birds/wildlife, when I don't want to be lugging the 500 (e.g., on a whale watch). The 100-400 is a better tool for that.
--My standard lens is the 24-105, so I don't need the 70-100 on the 70-200 lens.
--I have only had the 100-400 for a few months, and used it only on our Africa trip (on a 5D3, to complement the 5DSR wearing the 500 f/4L IS + 1.4xIII). It took great photos, and I used it at all focal lengths. I expect that I would continue to use it at all focal lengths.

Hope this clarifies things a bit. Thanks again for the thoughts!

Mark



Sep 08, 2017 at 04:27 PM
pshyvers
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Thinking about selling my 70-200 II


StarNut wrote:
--My principal use of the lens, other than kids' games, has always been as a landscape lens, stitching together high-resolution images. And always at f/8 or f/11. The 100-400 can do that just as well.


I've never owned one but I always read the 70-200mm f/4 is the better choice than the f/2.8 for this too, because it performs equally for less $$ and weight. (And landscape often involves some lugging)



Sep 08, 2017 at 04:30 PM
1      
2
       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password