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
351 746533 Nov 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $3,260.30
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.82
8.19
9.4
ef70-200_28lisu_1_

Specifications:
Incorporating Canonís 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
       †††
hsw21
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Aug 18, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1176
Review Date: Jul 29, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Image Quality Build Quality
Cons:
Wish it is a bit cheaper (of course it is just my wishful thinking).

I'm eye-ing this lens for a while, have to wait because of the money (have to save for it) and because of the reviews that says we dont need it, its too heavy, could do the job with F4 version, etc, etc, etc....

One day I have enough money to get it, plus there was rebate program ($100) and my brain also wasn't in 100% normal working condition, so I "accidentally" click the "submit order" button and there you go, I've bought it....

Used it for the first time at the wedding, and yeah, people were right, it was too heavy, after just an hour holding it, my left hand becomes so shaky, but I got great result on that day though...
So, conclusion, it gives great result, but weight is a little bit of an issue for me.

Used it again for second time at different wedding, this time prepared better than the last one.
I was able to get even better result than the last time and my hand is not to tired anymore.

BTW, I also have the F4 non IS version and love it too because of the result and the lightweight, but the F2.8 IS is more preferable because it looks better (more "real PRO" like), image quality (I love both result from F4 and F2.8 IS), bokeh and lower light capability when needed OR in my case I can use my F4 if the wedding is outdoor and use the F2.8 IS if its indoor.

Conclusion, I have no regret buying it.
I love the lens, I love the result, I'm happy with it.


Jul 29, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add hsw21 to your Buddy List  
Brian Mitchell
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 7, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 26, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: build quality, good range, wide aperture.
Cons:
weight, cost

A great lens, with a very good build quality and range. It works well with a 1.4x or 2x extender. Some of my better photos with it are here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/62641147@N00/sets/72157601022389640/

But, then, this lens is also a brick! It is really too heavy to carry around on a regular basis. So think hard about why you want to use it. If it is for day-light outdoor shots then go with the f/4.0 version. Its cheaper, much lighter, and you'll carry it more often.


Jul 26, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Brian Mitchell to your Buddy List  
FatBoyAl
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 671
Review Date: Jul 23, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build, AF speed, Bokeh, even the hood...
Cons:
Weight

So now I've owned all the 70-200's except the non-IS 2.8 version. To me, this was the pinnacle of the model. Sure, on forums you read that the non-IS version is a bit sharper, but not in most print sizes. This is the lens you want if you want to have it all. The only advantage you'll be missing out on is lightweight. The f4IS version is so sharp you can cut cheese with it and half the weight. But you can't get the bokeh - or in low-light - the shots with the f4 version, IS or no.
This thing is built like all products costing this much should be. When you think about it - and I don't suggest doing that - you could buy a hot tub for what this bad boy costs.
Anyway, out in the field or under the canopy of trees, in a studio or the confines of an auditorium, this lens performs. Once you've used it, you start to notice it everywhere. On TV you'll see it on the news, commercials - everywhere. There's a reason for that. It's simply the choice for pros.
One other thing, while you'll hear tell of 100-400's and 16-35's and many other lenses going in for calibration or front-back focusing, you just don't hear that much going wrong with this lens. Canon has it all together for this one.
If you can spring for it, there is no substitute. Period.


Jul 23, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add FatBoyAl to your Buddy List  
Breitling65
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 31, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5240
Review Date: Jul 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.99 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Excellent zoom lens, fast and good build.
Cons:
Expensive, heavy, not as sharp with F2.8. After using L primes become useless since not up to the level.

I used this lens for 18 month and sold, not because something was wrong. Main reason - I prefer primes and quality I am getting from primes. Even superb zoom as this lens can't beat prime.
Still good lens in my opinion, extremely popular among professionals.


Jul 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Breitling65 to your Buddy List  
factoryphoto
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Jul 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 304
Review Date: Jul 20, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Great workhorse lens, works well in low light, af is very fast.Color is 2nd to none its what I expect from Canon "L" line
Cons:
Nothing at all

Ive used this lens for 3 years now and it has been my work horse lens for motoxand a basic all around lens.I prefer shooting with primes but this lens is simply an amazing piece of equipment. The colors and contrast are beautiful and it works very well in low light conditions. IS is a must for me shooting 1200 photos in 4 hours means im running half the time and the IS makes up for my shakiness. I think any nov-pro photog should have this lens in there arsenal it's the best all around lens IMHO.
www.factoryphoto.com


Jul 20, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add factoryphoto to your Buddy List  
HMZRHS
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 10, 2007
Location: Brunei
Posts: 62
Review Date: Jul 19, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Good for Low Light Photography
Cons:
Weight.
Jul 19, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add HMZRHS to your Buddy List  
David W.
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 19, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 8
Review Date: Jul 13, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent lens, good for low light.
Cons:
On the heavy side, but when travelling I take my EF 85 f1.8 instead.

I looked at all of Canon's 70-200 L lenses. I liked the 70-200 f2.8 L IS the best. I sometimes use the 1.4X extender with it.

Jul 13, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add David W. to your Buddy List  
Andreas Petter
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 9, 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:
Cons:

Question: I have ordered the 70-200 2.8 IS lens and a 2xII teleconverter from Canon. I will receive it during the week and will update a review. Currently I have read both good and bad reviews about the combination of the lens and TC. I almost ordered a 100-400 L lens from Canon but decided to get the 70-200+TC instead. I want more versatility. I like taking photos of people, landscapes etc but rarely birds. Any feedback would be great to help me. Thank you!

Jul 9, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Andreas Petter to your Buddy List  
Lammer
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 5
Review Date: Jul 5, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: IS that works, very sharp, i like the white colour, nice weight
Cons:
Just a very bit soft on the 70 end, and its pricey, but I knew that going in, I dont like that the paint comes off

I had this lens for a while now and let me say. It-is-AWESOME.
1) The IS actually works. I had the 28-135... I was like "is this thing broken? IS is useless". Now I see the true potential of IS. And it rocks.
2) It was tack sharp. I have a split screen installed on my camera and it aligns always. I can always touch up with full time manual as well.
3) You must be as thin as chicken bones if you think this is heavy. I just turned 17 and I can hand hold this for days. I think the weight is very nice. There are people hand holding 400mm L, I think you can manage this baby.
4) Its white! I love the colour lol.


The only thing I REALLY have against these L lenses is how the paint likes to chip near the tripod collar. Ive used several other white L lenses before, and they all seem to have paint chips on the tripod collar. If only canon can include touch up paint with every purchase lol.



Jul 5, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Lammer to your Buddy List  
Steven Everitt
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 5, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 518
Review Date: Jul 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Everything really, Speed of AF and Bokeh are fantastic
Cons:
I guess after a while the weight is very noticable but I will just try and work out in the gym a bit more!

I must have read more or less every review on this forum when I was deciding whether to buy either 70-200 or 100-400 and it is with great pleasure I can now sit here and write my own review on the 70-200! I bought it specifically for my recent trip to Tanzania along with a 2x extender. Being 2.8 through out the range meant a constant 5.6 with the extender, a major factor in my choice.

I wonít bore you to much apart from saying that everyone who said it is an excellent lens is right! I am now reviewing over 2000 pictures from my trip and I am over the moon with my results (if I do say so myself). Some of the birds are still a bit far away in the frame and a bit further reach would have been better for them, but that is something for the future. The lens gives perfect mid-range access for me!

If you are unsure - buy it! You wonít be disappointed!



Jul 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Steven Everitt to your Buddy List  
msuben
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 1, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 103
Review Date: Jun 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,500.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: The IS really helps with slow shutter speeds, solid feel and built to last. I have seen a few reviews in forums that say it is soft at 2.8 but I'm getting great shots wide open. I sold a few primes to get this lens and have no regrets. I like the flexibilty of the zoom and was tired of constantly changing lenses.
Cons:
None



Jun 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add msuben to your Buddy List  
paknip
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 28, 2005
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 21, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast, sharpness, aperture, well-built, IS is excellent and it's WHITE!
Cons:
none



Jun 21, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add paknip to your Buddy List  
ivyinvestor
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 17, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 237
Review Date: Jun 19, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,415.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Aperture, bokeh, build, value, useful hood.
Cons:

It's all been said, so I'm not going to repeat, ad infinitum. Simply put: I bought this lens for mid-field reach at weddings and corporate events, as well as for portraits. If need be, I shoot it wide open at ISO 1600 on a 30D and am consistently overjoyed with the results.

Jun 19, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ivyinvestor to your Buddy List  
Rei Lombardi
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 16, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 16, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharpness and handling are just perfect, with an overall image quality that's now become a benchmark. The way it fits in my hand, how balanced it feels...a great lens that comes with me everywhere I go!
Cons:
I spend 5 minutes trying to come up with a con...but couldn't! That must tell you something!

If you don't want a white lens, don't use Canon.
If you don't want a heavy lens, don't buy pro lens, buy a 55-200mm!
If you don't want an expensive lens...well, maybe you are in the wrong game!
The EF 70-200 L IS USM it's white, it's heavy and indeed it's expensive, if you can't cope with all that, maybe you should think about start collecting stamps or something.
It doesn't get any better than this! This is a dream lens and the 'compromises' that it's use require are far less annoying than the whining from some 'self-belived' photographers.
If you complain to much about something that is so perfect and so wanted by so many people, then you should reconsider your status as a photographer and put down your name to take part in the next Opra show!
For the rest of you, REAL photographer that appreciate and value the good thing in life, this is an AWESOME lens!
Buy it if you can afford it and ENJOY IT!!!!!!!!!!!


Jun 16, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Rei Lombardi to your Buddy List  
Ed Cucci
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 18, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Review Date: May 2, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: It's white
Cons:
It's white

I've only had this lens for a few days but I'm very impressed with how accurate and sharp it is (yes even at 200mm). I will admit that at 200mm and 2.8 it's a bit soft (for a large print) but by f8 its tack sharp. I have a 21" HD monitor and I can fill the whole screen with an image shot at 200mm and have printed a 13" X 19" (Canon Pro 9000) copy and it looks great. I know a lot of guys have complained that this lens is soft at 200mm at any apeture but I dissagree. Anyway, great IS, color and fast AF. I'm giving it a 10 for my copy anyway. Very pleased.

May 2, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ed Cucci to your Buddy List  
silmaril
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 5, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 18
Review Date: Apr 26, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, excellent clarity and colour. If my 24-105L was this sharp, Nikon would be put out of business.
Cons:
Heavy and "white".

I bought this lens several months ago but hesitated posting a review until I have used this extensively. The review is from a point of view of a keen amateur photographer and used primarily on a 5D.

Without a doubt, this is easily the best lens I have. I have a copy of the 17-40L and the 24-105L and the cheap 50mm f/1.8 but this 70-200L really blows them all away. It is much sharper with less distortion, better colour and most importantly I find the pictures with the 70-200 has a 3D feel to it. Bokeh is also excellent. I find the lens sharpest at f/8 to f/9.

The IS works very well and I can get decent shots at 1/30 most of the time, but in order to ensure you bag 100% of your shots, you should shoot at a faster speed especially at longer length.

My gear is purchased primarily for travels. I find that this is too heavy to carry around and seldom bring it out on holiday unless I know there is an obvious need for it.

I also have the 1.4x teleconverter and find that the image quality decrease substantially when using it. I won't say the image is terrible (still better than than the 17-85 IS which I had awhile back), but it's ranking amongst my L lens will drop from #1 to last.

I have several friends who travel extensively. They decided to sell this lens for the 70-200L f/4 IS because of the weight. They did not notice any image quality difference. If the cost/weight is going to bother you, I suggest going with the f/4 route.

A toss up between the f/4 and f/2.8 IS? If you are rich, built like a tank and need f/2.8, get this. If not, get the f/4. Image quality is going to be the same.

The white lens bothers me. From what I read, some actually like it as it gives them the "feel good pro factor". I am not a pro and don't feel the need to feel like a pro. My concern is not wanting the lens to be more prominent than it already is. After all, this is a pretty big lens! It is hard to get a natural/candid shot of the subject at times because they are usually stumped by the size of a big white lens pointing at them!!

Last thing to note. When I use this lens on my 20D, the AI Servo does not work. I don't have this issue with the 20D with other lens and the AI Servo on the 5D works with this lens. This seems like an isolated accident but you should check it out if you have a crop camera.


Apr 26, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add silmaril to your Buddy List  

†††



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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
351 746533 Nov 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $3,260.30
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