 |
|
|
nlwnb
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 29
|
|
Review Date: Nov 21, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,650.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, color nice bokeh, outstanding results at low shutter speed
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I love this lens. I get great results at 1/50 at 20mm on a consistent basis. I think the overall quality equals the 200 2.8 l
but due to the is thins lens is more versatile. i wish canon made more f2.8 IS zooms
|
|
 Nov 21, 2005
|
|
cezars
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 1, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 137
|
|
Review Date: Nov 19, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, f/2.8, quality
|
|
Cons:
|
weight, price, color (yellowish-white paint instead of pure white)
|
|
I didn't buy this lens yet, only rented it to be able to evaluate it. While not as exceptional as I expected, this lens has a wonderful focal range which can be easily expanded to a 100-300mm F/4 IS equivalent using the 1.4x converter. If you have a 1.6x crop factor DSLR, that would mean even more: 160-450mm.
I noticed some auto-focus imperfections on the copy I've rented. On half the pictures, details are ok but far from being perfect. Light conditions were very bad the day I've shot with this lens, and I had to rely on the large aperture and IS, but I still had to shoot at ISO 800 (and I HATE noise). IS is great, but I expected a bit more.
A positive point is that it's so heavy that after a full day of shooting, you won't need to go to the gym for a week! 
Another consideration: while IS could be useful, I've heard the optical quality of the IS version is a bit less "perfect" that the non-IS version. And considering the IS version costs about $600 more, is heavier and bigger, you really have to be SURE you need that feature. I didn't find it very useful in my case (wildlife)
Here are two sample shots of a Bobcat. You can view the details by zooming in (click on the picture)
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=1019054
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=1019064
|
|
|
Nov 19, 2005
|
|
mbarrow67
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Nov 2, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Results, handling, F3.8, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight, cost, hunting
|
|
|
I will be travelling to Masai Mara during the dry season migration next year, and have been looking for a high quality but versatile safari lens for my 20D (1.6x FOV). With the demand for internal focussing/zooming, and a limit on the number of lenses/bodies that I can take, I had discounted the 100-400 vacuum pump, and 300mm primes and narrowed the choice to either the 70-200 2.8/2.8IS with occasional 1.4x teleconverter, or the Sigma 100-300 F4 EX, with a 1.4x teleconverter for absolute emergencies.
I owned this lens for 24 hours through the Jessops (UK) 30-day money back guarantee, and took around 700 pictures around the centre of York. In the good light on Saturday, this lens was nothing short of excellent, however the less favourable conditions of Sunday resulted in lots of hunting and missed focus, almost to the degree that I doubted that the AF was fully functioning (my f4 L worked fine in the same conditions)
The IS was very nice, but for the safari, I'll probably have to attach a 1.4x TC, so when compared to the Sigma, the choice is either £1700 for a 100-280 F4 IS Canon with TC degraded images or £700 for a 100-300 F4 (non-IS) Sigma, and as an amateur, I could not justify this extra cost.
I would recommend this lens to anybody handholding for indoor small-court sports, where f4/no-IS would just not suffice, but the limited range and high price meant that I couldn't justify it.
Until Canon release a 100-300 F2.8 IS L, I'll stick with the Sigma.
|
|
|
Nov 2, 2005
|
|
jd1566
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 7, 2004
Location: South Africa
Posts: 46
|
|
Review Date: Nov 1, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, f2.8, tripod collar design
|
|
Cons:
|
Strange Bokeh when IS is on
|
|
|
Overall very satisfied with this lens. The IS MAKES it.. I owned the non-IS f2.8.. It gave me much better Bokeh, but too many blurred shots due to camera shake when I'm wasn't using a tripod..
One significant negative of this version is the Bokeh produced at full aperture with IS turned on.. instead of shadows and lines blending into each other this lens seems to give a harsh edge effect which is displeasing and distracting.
Weight... A downside which makes it less portable than it's non-IS and f4 versions, both optically better. However the IS comes to the rescue.. and my reject % has really decreased.
Works well with a 1.4x extender, but very poorly with the 2x extender. Please do not buy this lens if it has to do double duty as a 400 f5.6 or 100-400, as you will NOT be pleased with the result. Also, the extenders reduce autofocus speed and efficiency, as well as the loss of a stop or two of light.
If you want it for portraits, close wildlife, and don't plan to walk through a crowded city with it then go for it. If you value your discreteness (i.e. don't want to draw too much attention) then go for the optically inferior but more practical 70-300 DO lens.
|
|
|
Nov 1, 2005
|
|
Moto_Guzzi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 30, 2005
Location: South Africa
Posts: 23
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
1-Biuld Quality, 2-Coulour,3-Contrast, 4-focus fast, works well with both extenders 1.4x & 2.0, [but problem os sharpness persists.]
|
|
Cons:
|
1-Cannot take cristal sharp pictures.An unsharp picture goes nowhere for me.
|
|
|
Canon 70-200mm IS L 2.8 USM.
I note the serial numbers, incase it point to a time or factory with poor quality control, and others having similar problems.
Initially I used the lens on my 1st 350D, and was immedialy impressed with the colour & contrast, but the real sharpness always lacked. In the end I bought a 70-300 IS also and another 350D body, which was overexposing and also send back[SN=0530407472].
The 70-300 IS was way sharper.
I proved on tripod that the 70-200 IS cannot take a sharper picture under excact same conditions and same settings as 70-300 IS on tripod with IS off or on or handheld.
One of the 1st things I noticed was the 70-200 IS, the tripod never helped me at all.
I later noticed that on the 70-200 IS, the centre of the spot on wich I focussed, shift up or down, while it does not happen on the 70-300 IS on same tripod, same situation, same height. I thought maybe this is a clue as to the lens problem.
Presently it is with Canon, and I hope I get something back that works properly as it should, I can't wait.
The serial nr on this lens is: SN-290577
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2005
|
|
kunobe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 19, 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 27, 2005
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
After my last post here I've did some more testshoots and really this lens is dissapointing me the whole way ...
Like said last post, not much more "light effectivenesss" with the 2.8 compared to the f/4 and on a scale from 1 to 10 only 3 pictures come out that are sharp (where with my f/4 this was 8 out of 10 ...).
Also when shooting with IS turned off I get more sharp pictures then when turned ON !
Today I contacted Canon Belgium about this issue and they advised me to bring the lens back and do a switch on "DOA" grounds (Dead On Arrival) and see what differences this could make.
I'm a little bit concerned when switching the lens it will be the same mess all-over again and that it has something to do with the synchro between the body and lens and that a new lens would be the same outcome.
Has somebody here dealed with the same kind of problems or has anybody any suggestions ?
Does anybody know a good testing ground to see if the IS is doing what it should do ?
I'm only comparing with my previous 70-200 f/4 where I was wildly enthousiastic about... the new one has cooled this enthousiasm a little bit (read: a lot).
Canon Belgium told me when the same problems arrise I should return the lens with the body (EOS 350D) at the service center, but then I will be without camera for at least 3 weeks ...
Couldn't think or oversee that one couls have that much trouble with a lens of nearly 2000 euros ...
Anyone with any suggestions please drop me a line...
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2005
|
|
sigbusyff
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Oct 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredible sharpness, speed (both aperture and AF), IS
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I also own the 50mm f/1.4 and 17-40mm f/4 L, but this is my first IS lens, and also my first in the f/2.8 L series. Before purchase, I was put off by the weight of this beast, as well as the price premium over the f/4. What won me over was the additional low light potential of this lens - one stop of aperture, plus two or three stops of IS.
Having handled the lens in the shop, the weight isn't too much of an issue. I've since spent all day at the zoo shooting with it hand-held, and it wasn't a problem. In fact, my other lenses now feel too light in comparison!
The IS is extremely effective. I can hand-hold at 1/50th at 200mm, and 1/20th at 70mm, on a 1.6x crop. Combined with a decent ISO1600 setting, this means you've got the potential to use this lens indoors without flash. The f/4 certainly doesn't offer that!
Sharpness is exceptional - on a par or possibly better than the 50mm f/1.4. It's slightly softer, but perfectly acceptable, at f/2.8 but sharpens up very quickly as it stops down. AF is very quick and accurate, and the lens is surprisingly usable with an extension tube, giving a much wider range of usable focussing range than the others I own.
This lens is everything I anticipated in terms of the amazing quality and sharpness, but is much more versatile than I expected. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2005
|
|
kunobe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 19, 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 19, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
|
Bought a new EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS L USM glass yesterday to replace my 70-200 f/4 and was a little bit disappointed.
When shooting in auto mode on my EOS 350D the flash keeps popping-up at the same time my f/4 did ...
I hoped that with the f/2.8 the lens should be more sensitive and that the flash should stay more in its non-functioning position... or am I doing something wrong ?
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2005
|
|
dickie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 57
|
|
Review Date: Oct 18, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,800.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Awesome color and contrast. Sharp at f2.8 and almost instand focusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, weight.
|
|
|
In a matter of two weeks I went from the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (virtually fell apart mechanically in a matter of a hour) to the Canon 70-200 f4L (excellent but a bit too slow for how I shot) to the Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS. Could not be happier.
Outstanding image quality with awesome contrast and colors. Focusing is bang on a very very fast. The best zoom lens I have owned to date. Very sharp throughout the zoom range at f2.8. Love the IS as it gives me the ability to handhold indoor photos at 1/60sec without the need for a monopod/tripod.
Just have to get use to the idea of people coming and asking questions when I am out shooting with this lens.
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2005
|
|
Marc B
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 20, 2005
Location: France
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Oct 7, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,900.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
90% of your shots are sharp. Everyone think you're a pro (could be negative :))
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost 3 times the price of my SLR body
|
|
Like many other I've started my 70-200 adventure with a f/4.
Everyone who is "L" adicted knows that you always want more. So I bought this beauty @B&H and NO I don't regret any of my dollars (euros..)
What is amazing is haw many sharp pictures you have in a shot session. Almost all of them. It could be indoor, outdoor, whatever (not extreme) condition, you will have some sharp pictures.
For me I don't find it heavy at all, but my wife doesn't share this vision...
If you can afford it... well you know
|
|
|
Oct 7, 2005
|
|
stjepan.gut
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 28, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, bokeh, fast. short: perfect.
|
|
Cons:
|
little too long when in the crowd (people bumping heads)
|
|
|
if you are looking for the best - this is the one. it is NOT too heavy (it is just a bit longer - with the lens shade - if you are making picz in the crowd). it is fast, IS works like breeze, it is extreme sharp. powerful (f/2.8) enough for the indoor work w/o flash or additional light. no cons at all! i was in the dilema to go with the f/4, but when you compare, f/4 looks like a toy (NHF!). f/4 is not bad lens, but this one is the higher class in every aspect.
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2005
|
|
jcmedeiros
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 744
|
|
Review Date: Sep 21, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,470.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Versatile and sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Pricey
|
|
|
If you can only afford one zoom telephoto, this is the one to get. I use it all the time shooting sports with/without the EF 1.4x extender and get fantastic results. I've shot down at 1/30th second hand held with the image stabilizer enabled with great success. This is the gold standard in L series zoom telephoto lenses.
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2005
|
|
Foochey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 25, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Sep 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Absolutely one of the best Canon lenses out there, fast, and deadly focus accuracy.
|
|
Cons:
|
None. Nada. Zippo.
|
|
|
This is by far my favorite lense, absolutely stunning images in any lighting. The size is very comfortable and the build quality is superb. I use mine primarily for shooting sports and about the only problem I've noticed is that sometimes I may hit the AF/M focus switch inadvertently. Superb images corner to corner and the IS is worth every penny. Some prefer the non-IS version, but not me. I wish every Canon lense had it. The bokeh and speed of this lense are superb as well, with very little distortion, and very little vingetting.
|
|
|
Sep 8, 2005
|
|
mikegreenslade
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 6, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, Fast Autofocusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
price
|
|
I have had this lens for 3mths now, and must say I think its a brilliant lens. Sharpness is spot-on, auto-focusing is as fast as they come.
I quite like the Cream Colour, or off-white as I shoot at some big events (Soccer and Rugby) so are among plenty of other White L Lens. I also shoot Cricket with this lens.
As I shoot 'Floodlight' matches aswell, a f2.8 is a must.
I sold the f4 70-200mm to buy this lens. I hand hold this lens no problem on my 1D Mk2 and 20D(with battery grip) boddies.
In the UK this lens is selling for £1350 or there abouts so, I ordered
this lens from a Kind person in The States and I saved £350.
By-the-way, I never remove the Tripod collar when hand holding.
Photos can be viewed on my website.
http://www.mikezite.co.uk
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2005
|
|
discreet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2004
Location: China
Posts: 1148
|
|
Review Date: Aug 23, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Define the 1/focal rule of physics in photography
|
|
Cons:
|
Big and Expensive
|
|
|
I think the other stuff has been mentioned to death but let me point out the most amazing thing about this lens.... it defines the law of physics of photography.
If you look at the prime lens in the 70-200 range, only the 85mm and 135 are one stop faster. With IS you can go up to 3 stops "faster" meaning that you have "faster" lens than any of the primes out there. And it comes with additional DOF so you get a photo that has more DOF.
Also, this is a brainless lens. Set it to 1/125 and just fire away. Do not need to think about anything else. Makes low light concert photography a blast. I pair it with a 85/1.8 and I am also ready for 90% of the low light shoots i encounter where i cannot use a flash..
One thing i hate is that the switched on the lens are too sensitive. In particular the IS on/off switch and the AF/MF switich.. other than that... this is one lens where you can have your cake n eat it
|
|
|
Aug 23, 2005
|
|
mjsutherland
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 14, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Aug 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent results
|
|
Cons:
|
Nil
|
|
|
Overall a perfect lense. Being white it is very conspicuous but this is an advantage for some paying clients as it looks expensive, obviously a disadvantage if you are trying to be inconspicuous. Results are consistently outstanding. It is easier to make good telephotos like this and canon are particularly good at it ( unlike wider angles, I am not so full of praise for the 24-70 L 2.8 I have ) but still it is simply the best lense of this class I have ever used. I also have the 1.4 extender and it does not compromise results, making the lense more versatile.
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
352
|
725874
|
Feb 6, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
91% of reviewers
|
$3,248.85
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.82
|
8.18
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
