 |
|
|
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
|
|
KKFung
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 20, 2008
Location: China
Posts: 773
|
|
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
|
|
albertino
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 23, 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
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
JanPhoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 27, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 17
|
|
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
|
|
albertino
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 23, 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
|
|
Ratnavel
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 17, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 45
|
|
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  .
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
|
|
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
|
|
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3060
|
|
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
|
|
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 272
|
|
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
|
|
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3060
|
|
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
|
|
srugina
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 6, 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 39
|
|
Review Date: Nov 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, solid build, IS works very well
|
|
Cons:
|
quite heavy and pricey. Very big especially with hood on
|
|
It is probably one of the best pro lenses out there. It is heavy but also perfectly sharp and the IS works very well.
I have to say it looks kinda scary with the hood on, but luckily you don't have to get so close to the subject with such a lens.
I strongly recommend it to those photographers who earn their living out of taking photos.
Cheers!
sandra
http://sandrarugina.eu/
|
|
|
Nov 6, 2008
|
|
chinks
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 19, 2004
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 266
|
|
Review Date: Oct 26, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,700.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, quick to focus, fast at 2.8, Good focal range from 70 to 200mm, IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Chromatic aberration at larger apertures at edge even on 1.6x crop cameras, focus hunting on 20D and 30D in many low light conditions, heavy, price.
|
|
|
Well for this range this is about the best piece of kit you can get. Unfortunately it's pricey. I expected fast, dead on focus locking for this top line lens but I get focus hunting quite a lot in lower light conditions.
Although it fits a 1.4x TC, the picture quality drops to an amount I'm not comfortable with, so does the focusing competency.
Fortunately on 20D and 30D bodies, focus is dead on and quick when the center spot is used in brighter conditions.
The chromatic aberrations at its edges even on 1.6x crop cameras is disappointing. Thankfully it's not that obvious for most pictures. But at f/2.8 edge quality suffers.
I suppose it's fantastic for a zoom and one can't really complain too much but for some work I know I'll be reaching out for some workhorse primes.
|
|
|
Oct 26, 2008
|
|
photosbyjay
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 12, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 12, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Breathtaking detail, solid build, creamy dreamy background blur, rich colours
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy purple fringing in high contrast areas
|
|
This is a great all round lens. I am a wedding photographer and have used this on 2 weddings already and love its versatility. It's great for framing the bride & groom and then quickly zooming in close for a ring exchange or tears on the bride's face.
Opening the shots up in Lightroom or Photoshop is such a pleasure; some shots just make me stop and stare. Every detail (hairs, pores, dress texture) is rendered very realistically, "just as I remember seeing it". The background blur is creamy and smooth and round, and gives everything a dreamlike quality. Autofocus is super quick - you can just trust it. I combine it with the joystick focus point method and it's very fast and intuitive.
You can see a gallery of shots I took with my 40D and this lens at http://www.photosbyjay.com.au/wedding-photographer-sydney/pre-wedding-photo-session-mostafa-and-houda-cabarita-park/
On a 40D with cropped sensor it does reach a lot - you'll need a fair bit of room to back up for things like group shots (I found myself switching to the 16-35 for the bigger groups because there just wasn't enough room). I do find myself sometimes zooming to 200mm though (320mm on a full frame).
The only caveat I've found so far is the nasty purple fringing which seems to turn up in very high contrast areas. Take a look at
http://www.photosbyjay.com.au/images/blog/Rani-0099.jpg
and
http://www.photosbyjay.com.au/images/blog/Rani-0102.jpg
To me this is really severe considering the cost of the lens. It doesn't seem to happen when the subject is not wearing plain white and not in direct sunlight.
Overall, this is one of the most satisfying and impressive lenses I've ever owned, and I find myself wishing I could rewind time so I could have this on one shoulder and my 16-35 on the other shoulder to shoot all the past weddings I've done.
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
352
|
726840
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
