about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
353 741991 May 9, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
92% of reviewers $3,231.35
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.82
8.19
9.4
ef70-200_28lisu_1_

Specifications:
Incorporating Canon’s second generation Image Stabilization technology, this telephoto zoom responds in as little at 0.5 seconds, while providing up to three stops of correction for camera shake. Its AF system has been refined for better response time and tracking speed. And even the new 8-blade circular aperture offers a more pleasing out-of-focus image. Constructed to pro standards, this fast zoom is also highly resistant to dust and moisture, too.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
          
kingoftheapes
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 70
Review Date: Mar 24, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Fast and silent autofocus. IS works. F2.8.
Cons:
Soft images. Heavy. Expensive.

I have to say that I am disapointed with the soft images I get from this lens on my 5D Mark II.

Compared to my 85 1.8, 50 1.8, and 24-105, this has the softest images by far at all apertures.

Maybe I got a bad copy, but for $1600 it should be great right out of the box.

I'm going to return this to Amazon and ask for a different copy.




Mar 24, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add kingoftheapes to your Buddy List  
Badmono
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 9, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 19, 2009 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: Easy to sell on ebay after your discover how bad it really is:-( There's plenty for sale on ebay so other's obviously think the same as me!!!
Cons:
White - Huge - Softfocus images - expensive - I can't think of one good thing to say about it. A disgrace to Canons 'L' series lenses.

A real real real disappointment, all my mates really rated this lens, and I always envied them when I didn't own one myself. However when I eventually bought one I was shocked at the poor IQ, and serious lack of sharpness & crisp images, even when stopped down to F8, IMO it was unusable. My mates said I had to get used to the lens - well after a month or so of wasted effort, I gave up. I never took one sharp shot with this lens over this month of wasted effort, on either a FF or 1.6x crop body
My second worst Canon lens EVER. the worst?? read 100-400 'L' - AIRPUMP' zoom review, if I can ever be bothered to write it.
>
After perusing the various Canon websites I took the plunge and bought a 135mm F2 'L' prime - WOWOWOWOW - a Wow at last, a real lens, producing awesome sharp images straight out of the box. Now it's my mates who are envious:-))
>
So it wasn't my technique after all it was just the awful Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS 'hell' zoom. Possibly I had a bad 'un but for the price I paid the thing was a disgrace to Canon's 'L' lens series.
>
The 70-200 hellzoom was immediately sold on ebay for a goodish price - I only lost 200UK pounds on the thing - A sharp sharp result at the end!!!


Mar 19, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Badmono to your Buddy List  
MTBtrials
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 4, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1372
Review Date: Feb 23, 2009 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,749.00

 
Pros: Image Quality, Bokeh, Sharpness, IS, Build Quality, functionality of the IS, great book (manual), comes with Tripod collar, hood, bag... I happen to like the white barrel, weather sealing is a nice touch...
Cons:
I don't like the feel of the hood when I go to mount it, perhaps that will go away with use.

Well, paying retail for this L lens it is still worth every penny. I am using it to shoot weddings and it will pay for it's self shortly.

Some people complain about the lens being white, but I feel like it is important to have your client know that you have purchased the best out there for the job. Perhaps if I were out in public more trying to get candids it would be important to me to have a subtle lens, but that isn't why I picked this gem up.

The weight is nicely balanced with my 40D, and I am sure that it would be even better with a little more bulk on the cameras end.

I never understood what people were saying about a lens responding well to post sharpening, or that it has great colour, but once I downloaded my images (RAW) to my PC and began to edit them in post I realised how much they come alive. The images are extrodinarily vibrant and sharp to begin with, and in post they come alive even more.

I don't know if the bokeh from this lens comes more from the sum of the elements, the 8 blade apeture, it's shape or what, but prior to owning this lens I thought that once you have blurred the background that you're good... not quite the case, sure my 50mm f/1.8 makes the background go away, but the 70-200 IS makes the background turn into art.

Prior to purchasing the 70-200 2.8 IS I considered the 2.8 L (non IS), two copies of the sigma 70-200 2.8 and the tamron 2.8.
I was impressed with the 2.8 L non IS, but felt that the sigma or Tamron could probably do as great of a job for less money, and I would end up getting the IS version later on down the road, so I had sort of ruled out the 70-200 2.8 L on those merits, and decided to test the 3rd party offerings...

The tamron got ruled out immediatley because I didn't like the push/pull to go from manual to autofocus,it was noisey, and I didn't like the feel of the lens (but the price was great).

The first sigma I tested front-focused, and I felt like the contrast was rather flat.... sort of like the look of snow a week after the last snowstorm when all the soot and exhaust dust has settled on it and there is this vague sense of yuck, but it's still pretty..... the second one wouldn't even lock focus (and we tested it in the store on my 40D, a 50D and a xsi).

After the second sigma I tested I decided to finally pick up the 70-200 2.8 IS, and as soon as I heard the subtle *ching* of the IS kicking in, and saw that at 200mm focal length 1/30 shutter speed is possible handheld (versus struggling for 1/120 without the IS) I was sold. I broke out the plastic and purchased the lens which I knew I would end up with after all (just a lot earlier than I expected)

This is my first "L" Lens and I am impressed with everything on it. The only thing I can really complain about is that the hood mounting and removal doesn't seem to come as naturally as it should, I feel like I try and drive the hood over a burr unless it is seated perfectly in the slot.

Also, the USM is silky smooth and quiet, and I have yet to accidentally bump any of the IS or focus switches on the side of the lens. The first thing I did when I picked this lens up was to mount a 77mm UV filter to protect my investment.

Happy shooting!


Feb 23, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add MTBtrials to your Buddy List  
MTBtrials
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 4, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1372
Review Date: Feb 23, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: IS, great colour, beautiful bokeh, Build quality, Finish, includes Lens Hood (felt lined), Includes tripod collar, includes bag, well written manual, looks professional, full time manual focus.
Cons:
I don't like the way the hood fits on the lens, maybe time will fix it.

Well, paying retail for this L lens it is still worth every penny. I am using it to shoot weddings and it will pay for it's self shortly.

Some people complain about the lens being white, but I feel like it is important to have your client know that you have purchased the best out there for the job. Perhaps if I were out in public more trying to get candids it would be important to me to have a subtle lens, but that isn't why I picked this gem up.

The weight is nicely balanced with my 40D, and I am sure that it would be even better with a little more bulk on the cameras end.

I never understood what people were saying about a lens responding well to post sharpening, or that it has great colour, but once I downloaded my images (RAW) to my PC and began to edit them in post I realised how much they come alive. The images are extrodinarily vibrant and sharp to begin with, and in post they come alive even more.

I don't know if the bokeh from this lens comes more from the sum of the elements, the 8 blade apeture, it's shape or what, but prior to owning this lens I thought that once you have blurred the background that you're good... not quite the case, sure my 50mm f/1.8 makes the background go away, but the 70-200 IS makes the background turn into art.

Prior to purchasing the 70-200 2.8 IS I considered the 2.8 L (non IS), two copies of the sigma 70-200 2.8 and the tamron 2.8.
I was impressed with the 2.8 L non IS, but felt that the sigma or Tamron could probably do as great of a job for less money, and I would end up getting the IS version later on down the road, so I had sort of ruled out the 70-200 2.8 L on those merits, and decided to test the 3rd party offerings...

The tamron got ruled out immediatley because I didn't like the push/pull to go from manual to autofocus,it was noisey, and I didn't like the feel of the lens (but the price was great).

The first sigma I tested front-focused, and I felt like the contrast was rather flat.... sort of like the look of snow a week after the last snowstorm when all the soot and exhaust dust has settled on it and there is this vague sense of yuck, but it's still pretty..... the second one wouldn't even lock focus (and we tested it in the store on my 40D, a 50D and a xsi).

After the second sigma I tested I decided to finally pick up the 70-200 2.8 IS, and as soon as I heard the subtle *ching* of the IS kicking in, and saw that at 200mm focal length 1/30 shutter speed is possible handheld (versus struggling for 1/120 without the IS) I was sold. I broke out the plastic and purchased the lens which I knew I would end up with after all (just a lot earlier than I expected)

This is my first "L" Lens and I am impressed with everything on it. The only thing I can really complain about is that the hood mounting and removal doesn't seem to come as naturally as it should, I feel like I try and drive the hood over a burr unless it is seated perfectly in the slot.

Also, the USM is silky smooth and quiet, and I have yet to accidentally bump any of the IS or focus switches on the side of the lens. The first thing I did when I picked this lens up was to mount a 77mm UV filter to protect my investment.

Happy shooting!


Feb 23, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add MTBtrials to your Buddy List  
KKFung
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 19, 2008
Location: China
Posts: 850
Review Date: Jan 14, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,522.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: high quality image produce, effective IS, excellent build quality, sharp enough even wide open
Cons:
big and heavy

Big and heavy but still easier to carry 135/2L + 200/2.8L for most condition.

If the hood can be designed like the 300/4L push-pull style it will be perfect in construction.

Image quality - needless to say, thousands of users proved that it is one of an excellent zoom.


Jan 14, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add KKFung to your Buddy List  
albertino
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 9, 2009 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: ottimo bokeh-stabilizazione-bilanciato-costruzione solida
Cons:
nessuna

un obiettivo che va ttenuto sempre in borsa e a disposizione per ritratti-attività sportive in esterni ed interni.
consigliato ed irrinunciabile


Jan 9, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add albertino to your Buddy List  
ladki
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Review Date: Jan 6, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Beautiful Colors, Bokeh is awesome and Sharp.
Cons:
none

I had the non - IS before I pulled the plug and bought this. But then ended up using it about 10% of the time. But after doing one wedding - I have it on my lens a lot now its about 75% of the time for doing Candid shots of my crazy son. The keeper rates are going up...

Jan 6, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ladki to your Buddy List  
disegno-s
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 15, 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 54
Review Date: Jan 6, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: If you are shooting motorsports this is the zoom lens to buy
Cons:
White and heavy, but you know that when you buy it

I have this lens for two racing seasons now, and it still blows me away, it is sharp at 200mm f/2.8 when shooting a 24 hours race.
Panning shots are great with this lens, I use it primarily for car sports (GT races and stuff like that) and it really shines here.

Af is blindingly fast and accurate, I have nearly no out of focus shots since buying this lens, sure it is expensive, but it is worth every penny you pay for it.

I even used it with the Canon EF 1.4 Extender, and sure the AF speed and image quality drop, but not dramatically enough to keep the shots from being published.

Currently use it on a 40D, and I am very pleased with it.

Johan
www.CarPhotoTutorials.com
Automotive photography made easy


Jan 6, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add disegno-s to your Buddy List  
six66
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 1, 2008
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 1
Review Date: Dec 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: great bokeh, constant 2.8 throughout the FL, IS, built quality & very fast focusing speed
Cons:
price & a tad heavy

i needed a lens to shoot concert/events. this lens is great, the IS is superb and the focusing speed is very very fast. I coupled this lens with the sigma 1.4x TC and i like what i see. I was in a dilema once, f4is or f2.8is? I went over to a cam shop and asked for both lens to test. I went home with the f2.8IS and never looked back.

highly recommended!!


Dec 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add six66 to your Buddy List  
JanPhoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 27, 2006
Location: Ethiopia
Posts: 32
Review Date: Dec 27, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,599.00

 
Pros: The BEST up-today for Canon DSLR’s.
Cons:
Non, Nada ... Zip !

This lens offers all you need in action photography with bonus in sharpness and definition department. IS is of course a big part of it and overall construction with weather seal is only adding to justify the price.

I use this lens a lot and it is one of my favos.

Highly recommended!


Dec 27, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add JanPhoto to your Buddy List  
albertino
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 22, 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 18, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: $170,000.00

 
Pros: Contrastato-nitido-versatile-stabilizzato-luminoso
Cons:
nessuno

ho posseduto il 70-200mm 2,8 il 70-200 f4 is il 70-200mm f4
e confermo che la versione stabilizzata 2,8 dispone di un superbo sfocato-forse leggermente più morbido a tutta apertura ma la sua grande qualità va osservata nella plasticità di immagini che riesce a regalare.


Dec 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add albertino to your Buddy List  
Ratnavel
Offline

Registered: Sep 17, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 50
Review Date: Dec 16, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,450.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent image quality, nice zoom range
Cons:
Weight, price

I had this lens for about 8 months. I used it about 10-15% of the time. At the time, I thought this was too little to have $1500 tied up so I sold it.

It wasn't too long before I started searching all the buy/sell forums for a 70-200 f2.8L IS. I even called the guy that bought mine and offered to pay more.

This lens.. may be used rarely has no equal in my opinion.

Indoor sports, concerts/stage performance is where this lens will shine the most. Weddings and candid is also very good although it's a little intimidating when you point this at guests at a wedding Smile.

If there is only one lens you can buy, then consider something in the 24-70mm, but your next purchase should be this one!!


Dec 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ratnavel to your Buddy List  
PanchoPhoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 80
Review Date: Dec 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Major quality overall, contrast, color dynamic, and IS
Cons:
It is too cute

I debated about the price rating but I must say, I owned the non-IS for years and shot a whole lot of indoor sports, concerts, and other indoor things where the non-IS was "almost" there, but not quite.

And this is why I decided to purchase the IS version. I sold 2 lenses, the 135/2 L and my 70-200 non-IS, in order to grab up a new IS so I could check out the difference and in hopes that the IS would offer me that tiny "edge" that counts.

I've had the lens for a month now and have shot a basketball tournament and a xmas concert. My keeper rate is about 98 percent where my keeper rate with the non IS was about 70 percent at "most" and it still lacked something that I cannot explain.

I am amazed with this lens, and the IS definitely makes a HUGE difference in my shooting. Again, I owned the non-IS, a sharp copy, for 3 years. The IS version could be compared to the high jumper who "almost" makes the jump. The non-IS is the "almost" whereas the successful jump comes from the IS.

I'll die before I sell this gem! Plant it with me when I die.


Dec 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add PanchoPhoto to your Buddy List  
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3127
Review Date: Nov 26, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: All it should be. Reasonably sharp at 2.8, good contrast. IS works well.
Cons:
Had to look at 3 or 4 copies to get one I felt was acceptable at 2.8. Some were very, very soft at 2.8. What I would consider unusable.

As noted above and in a previous review, the first one sent to me was a dud. Soft at 2.8 and front focusing. Went to a local brick and mortar store and went through 3 or so to get one acceptable. By acceptable I mean at least as good as the sigma 70-200 I had. This one is actually better at 200 than any of the sigmas I tried. Not quite up to drainpipe quality but close. The IS is welcome for low light candids.

Nov 26, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add twistedlim to your Buddy List  
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 273
Review Date: Nov 16, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: bokeh, IS, build, color
Cons:
big and heavy and white!!!!!!!!!!! a bit soft at f/2.8

nothing new to add for this great lens. just hope it is lighter and smaller, and is black. I've decided to sell it and get back f/4 version for now.

Nov 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add terminator to your Buddy List  
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3127
Review Date: Nov 15, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,575.00

 
Pros: Well built, well packaged.
Cons:
Soft at all focal lengths but did get acceptable at 4.0. USM got noisy for some reason after I tried to focus with the lens pointed 45 degrees down.

Soft at all focal lengths until f4, and it seems to front focus. When I tilted the lens down and focused on the ground the USM started to make a noticable noise when focusing. It eventually went away. Image quality is really no better than the 18-55 kitg lens. This lens is being sent back for a replacement. I am glad I bought it new, otherwise I would have to pay to have it fixed or just toss it. I will post again with the replacement and we will see how it goes.

I expected a lot more needless to say. The sigma was sharper and the draipipe blew it away. Hopefully the replacement will be better. I know there are limits to zoom lenses but this is not acceptable.


Nov 15, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add twistedlim to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
353 741991 May 9, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
92% of reviewers $3,231.35
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.82
8.19
9.4
ef70-200_28lisu_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next