 |
|
|
Cookies
Offline
Registered: Feb 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1257
|
|
Review Date: Jan 24, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,125.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp, built like a tank, very fast USM focusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
This is an amazing lens, wow! My copy is equally sharp through the range, f/2.8 up to f/11. It is my sharpest lens. Beating out my 24-70 L. AF is ultra fast with the USM. Color redition is excellent as well. Images taken with this lens just have that certain "pop" to them. Once you see that look, you'll be hooked.
The build quality is awesome. As one review said, this lens is everything they say it is. The price is high but you get your $$$$ worth.
|
|
 Jan 24, 2006
|
|
LeonD
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 7, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 227
|
|
Review Date: Jan 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,490.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The best lens i own,and possibly the best version of a 70-200 you can get(depending how much you rely on IS/VR).
|
|
Cons:
|
Once in a while,id like it to have IS,but the trade-off isnt only a sharper optic but also about $1,000 less,get a monopod.
|
|
|
My lost loved lens,i got it used for 1,490 Canadian and do not regret it for a second,too bad the original owner kept the carrying case.Like most i always wanted the IS version which is more versatile.But after a few weeks with it i don't miss IS at all,if you have trouble hand holding it a monopod solves it,and saves you lots.
As some mentioned before,this lens measures sharper than the IS version(seems to happen with quite a few comparisons between IS and non-IS lenses,tho the difference is small) and on field tests i find this lens to produce sharper images than my friend's 70-200 2.8 VR nikkor.It is also sharper than the 70-200 F4 i used to have.
USM is super fast like always.Colors and bokeh are awesome.Lens is heavy.Construction is great.Excellent lens for portraits,action,mid range wildlife and even landscapes if you can position yourself far enough.This is the lens i'd pick if i could only keep one.
Cant go wrong with this one,unless you need to have IS.
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2006
|
|
forestwan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 9, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jan 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp
fast
what do we need else?
|
|
Cons:
|
weight? color?
I do not complain.
|
|
It is my strongest hand in catching children on streets, it can take the child face out from crowd easily and sharply.
It works for children, of course works well for animal either.
besides it has good perfermance for lanscape, the special compressive feeling, I like.
Most of my PPs in this page are made from this lens.
http://spaces.msn.com/members/iikeshuwan/
|
|
|
Jan 9, 2006
|
|
TrinityR3
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 12, 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 121
|
|
Review Date: Jan 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,129.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp with accurate, contrasty color. Quiet with fast focus under decent lighting conditions.
Built like a tank.
|
|
Cons:
|
Built like a tank.
Wish I had IS for the same price.
|
|
|
This lens is everything they say it is.
It's got fast, quiet focus due to the f2.8 aperture and USM.
It has the ability to resolve sharp images with accurate, contrasty color.
And at the telephoto end, the images become even sharper and the bokeh even smoother.
This lens is built like a tank. You can knock this lens into a wall with a small amount of force and not bat an eye (although i wouldn't recommend doing so). It's likely to make even a 20D or 5D body feel cheap in comparisson.
Weight can be an issue. At 2.9lbs, this isn't a lens you'll want to walk around with all day. Especially not indoors where slower shutter speeds are critical. For some, a monopod / tripod is a must with this lens.
That being said, I have no problem hand holding this lens all day in moderate to good lighting conditions. Yes I am tired at the end of the day, but I also have the shots to justify that fatigue.
And to me, in the end, that's all that matters.
|
|
|
Jan 4, 2006
|
|
Hudspeth
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Dec 31, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This lens is great !!! It's my first step into the world of "L" and I understand why the difference in price.... well worth it. Build it great, not to heavy.
|
|
Cons:
|
I should have saved up another 2 months and got the IS version. None really
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 31, 2005
|
|
mfoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 2625
|
|
Review Date: Dec 30, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
A solid no fuzz performer
|
|
Cons:
|
Non yet
|
|
I finally added the 70-200 2.8L this fall after selling my 70-200 4L. While I have been happy with the 4L the 2.8L is a much better lens. It is sharper and the extra stop adds so much in the form of being able to control DOF and of course makes it possible to shoot at lower ISO.
I also have the 135 2L and the two are close in performance. The 135L still looks that little bit sharper to me but in most shooting situations the 70-200 2.8L adds so much in the form of versatility. I plan to keep both but while I thought I'd never sell the 135L it just may happen one day so that I can pick up an 85L, which I think may compliment the 70-200 better for me. On the long end I think I prefer the zoom for versatility and extra reach... for portraits I would still prefer a prime so we'll see.
When looking at the 70-200s the IS of course was an option but I chose not to get it after trying it out. I find the non-IS sharper and easier to handle.. Perhaps a non-issue for most but I found the IS just that little bit to heavy. While the IS is paramount to some I found it a bit gizmo like and found PQ better for the non-IS.
I've shot sports, some scenic stuff, a concert and much more with the lens and warmly recommend if you need a zoom.
Most of the shots in this Cross Country Skiing gallery were taken with this lens on either a 1D Mark II or 20D:
http://mfoto.smugmug.com/gallery/992013
A couple of other shots here:
http://www.pbase.com/mfoto/image/52426670/original
http://www.pbase.com/mfoto/image/51500017/original
http://www.pbase.com/mfoto/image/51296766/original
http://www.pbase.com/mfoto/image/51537174
|
|
|
Dec 30, 2005
|
|
Mucho Betis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 244
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely Sharp, fast, contrast, L.
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight
|
|
|
The best L Lens of all.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2005
|
|
painterdood
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Dec 21, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
built like a tank, effortless to use, super sharp, pro lense, does what it should do ...capture exactly what you see in great detail and colour !!
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far...except the cost ..but that was my fault ..I should have shopped around a bit more ..
|
|
|
Just went through a blitz of tests with the 24-105 and decided to return it and wait till the quality goes up and the price comes down on that lense. I had planned on getting a 70-200 F4 but my experience with the f4 24-105 in low light ( not good) left me convinced F2.8 lenses are the way to go.
I took the lense from the shop onto the street and started banging away. The day was rainy and overcast with moments of sun so the lighting was challenging quite a bit of the time.
When I got home and took a peek at what I had ...all I could do was stare..and say "Oh my!!" a whole lot of times.
This lense restores my confidence in L series lenses. It simply rocks..
If you are disatisfied with the lame, soft images your see coming from your present zoom ...run, don't walk, to your nearest camera store ..and get yourself this BAbAy!!! It will live up to the most glowing reports here and elsewhere and pay for itself in a zillion awesome shots...if you are a half way decent photographer..
Oh the extra bonus with this lense -- it will serve as an excercise machine for your upper body and prepare you for the challenges of even heavier glass .....lol.
Finally .. a happy L series camper here.
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2005
|
|
Serf
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 26, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 39
|
|
Review Date: Dec 20, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, flexible, light for the range - a must have.
|
|
Cons:
|
Useful to have a mono or tripod for close-ups as handholding can be a little iffy and may produce some blur in lower lighting.
|
|
|
May be the sharpest lens I own (have other L's and primes).
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2005
|
|
dphototeam
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: May 19, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Dec 12, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
picture quality, built, fast USM, internal focussing.
|
|
Cons:
|
NONE for me..
|
|
The BEST lens I own so far..
What a combo with my Canon 5D.. GREAT for landscape, and portrait..
Amazing picture quality even at 200mm wide open! GREAT built! Love the range at Full Frame, internal focus, USM is really FAST, Colors are wonderfull, Bokeh ?..mmmmm..YUMMY!
You can check out some landscape and portrait images (with 100% crop samples) shot with Canon EOS 5D at http://www.dphotojournal.com/canon-ef-70-200mm-f28l/
Indeed, it's a perfect lens for me...
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2005
|
|
Sea Dragon Rex
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 31
|
|
Review Date: Dec 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,019.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent build and amazing picture quality. Fast AF and beautiful Bokeh. This is what separates the L's from the rest.
|
|
Cons:
|
Maybe could be cheaper but it's definitely worth the money.
|
|
|
I've used this lens for both indoor and outdoor shots with my Rebel XT. Photos of my son's and daughter's soccer games are wonderfully sharp (would have been nice to have a longer lens for some of the shots but this is what I had; recently ordered the 70-300 IS USM). I've also took numerous shots of my children while visiting a local fish hatchery. I was able to take shots that had excellent depth (able to get picture of them feeding the fish) and others that focused on their faces with beautiful bokeh.
Some complain about the weight of the lens but it doesn't feel that heavy to me (I'm used to shooting an old Canon 35mm SLR with FD lenses). At this time I couldn't afford the IS lens so that may be something I'll look into the future but I'm stoked about this lens and can't wait to use it more on future outings.
|
|
|
Dec 8, 2005
|
|
Vole
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 22, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 797
|
|
Review Date: Nov 28, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
It's all been said already. Phenomenal value. Perfection in a tube.
|
|
Cons:
|
Gives a false sense that all Canon 'L' zooms are this good. They aren't.
|
|
|
Canon have long since nailed their telephoto Lenses, and this one is no exception. Just don't expect to be getting the same quality from their wider 'L' zooms.
Some say it's heavy. But for what this Lens gives you, it's a lightweight. Easily hand-holdable all day long on a 20d + Grip.
I had the f/4 version. The f/2.8 gives better IQ and the focus is much better and more accurate in low light. I've never had it miss focus yet. Probably another plus of being f/2.8.
Can I not give this an 11 rating? A Lens you'll never want to sell.
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2005
|
|
JohnR84740
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 412
|
|
Review Date: Nov 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
tack sharp ++++ lightning fast AF, beautiful bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
heavy
|
|
|
This lens is outstanding. It is my preferred lens for both sports and landscape, producing excellent images. It was my first "L" glass, and has convinced me of the enormous difference between consumer and pro level glass.
Using the 2x extender downgrades the image quality considerably (not recomended).
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2005
|
|
FCWquest
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 315
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Tack-sharp at f/2.8, nice size, easily hand-holdable, practically glued to the camera, works great with the 1.4x TC.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hood fits a little bit tight, but other than that, nothing!
|
|
|
The 70-200 is Canon's best zoom lens and is widely distributed throughout the photography world. The zoom is a very useful range and can cover just about any sports or photojournalism events, espcially with the use of the 1.4x TC. The lens is tack-sharp wide open and will continue to become sharper when stopped down. I find that this is the lens that is most often on my camera, it is the workhorse. It's also very compact and light comared to the Canon super-telephotos, just an outstanding lens, great for anyone who is looking to buy a mid range lens.
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2005
|
|
incdigital
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 226
|
|
Review Date: Nov 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $999.99
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Workhorse Lens, Build, AF, Sharpness, Bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight, but thats why i own the F4 version as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2005
|
|
thequickad
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Nov 10, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,149.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
fast focus, f/2.8, fixed length zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
no IS, heavy
|
|
|
I had tried this lens twice in the past two months (I bought it and sold it). This is a great lens for outdoors and with sufficient light. But I need to take pictures indoors at concerts with no flash and even at f/2.8 and with a Monopod, I am still loosing about 50% of my shots. I have decided to trade-up to an IS model.
If you need to take pictures at night events or indoors, go directly to the IS model.
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
179
|
441257
|
Oct 16, 2020
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
98% of reviewers
|
$1,134.20
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.85
|
9.08
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
