Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L USM Lens Review (with samples)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 вер 2024
- FULL FRAME RESULTS: • Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 U...
Here is the NON IS version of Canon's 70-200mm f2.8. It's fantastic...but it's aging. There have been a lot of advances in lens technology since 1995. In the face of competition with the likes of the new and similarly-priced Tamron 70-200 lens...is it still worth £1,000?
And can you get by without image stabilization?
If you've found this or other videos I've made to be helpful, then support me on Patreon! www.patreon.co...
All shots taken by me, with my trusty 18 megapixel Canon 60D.
Be sure to follow my Photostream on Flickr, to see sample pictures of lenses I've reviewed and to see previews of upcoming lenses, too! www.flickr.com...
Music: Kevin Macleod, 'Opportunity Walks' (www.incompetech.com)
Seeing as you ask...I've been thinking about this. When I finally get some money together, I'm going to get the Canon 70-200 f4 L IS. I'd love to have f/2.8...but these lenses are huge, heavy, impractical, and because of their huge glass elements, they have serious issues shooting against bright light. The Canon 70-200 f4 IS is just so ridiculously nice in every way, and it's actually transportable. I'd love f/2.8 for the narrow depth of field, but I'll just get a 135mm f/2 for that instead.
Would the f4 version be sufficient for weddings?
I just bought this lens last week. Your review is 100% accurate and concurrent with all my thoughts, including the loss of contrast when shooting sunwards. Still, like you stated, it does the job and there are many bargains to be had for this older lens. It's a suitable placeholder in my kit until I can justify the 70-200 2.8 IS II financially.
Excellent reviews from someone who knows very little about cameras, i just bought my first DSLR a week ago and your videos are a real help for guys like me with all the gear and no idea. thanks man
This is the best Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L USM review I've seen on UA-cam. Thank you very much! Do you have any recommendations for other 70-200 lenses in this price range?
If you're considering this or the Sigma. Get this (or the II with IS, even the f4 is preferable). The Sigma is great, but this is just on another level especially with the newer version. It has a price premium of course but it'll last you much longer and will sell better if you decide to get rid in the future. L lenses always retain their value.
love your reviews mate
I am planning to buy this in 2022! Thankyou mate for the review
Já comprou ? 😁
Thanks! Maybe if I can get hold of one one day.
You can. But if you read my comment again, you'll see that I'd like to also get the 135mm f/2 lens for narrow depth of field application. And if you're only really shooting at night, then you should probably get the f/2.8 version rather than f/4, but bear in mind that the fantastic high ISO performance of modern full frame digital cameras is so good that the extra stop won't make an enormous difference there
Can you review this lens for APS-C or the 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS for APS-C and full frame please
great review. I have one with me from the used market, at roughly 500 pound.
It satisfied me that doesn't have deep pocket, haha~
My hun just got me this same lens last night. It’s in mint condition comes with original hood, bag and collar. She paid $450 us Dollars. Do you think she got a good deal!? Nice video by the way 👏🏻👌🏻from Denver Colorado
Great review Chris, as your work always is.
Great review. I own this lens... Overall its a killer... Only downside is the weight... Keep shooting guys... Cheers
just getting this lens.I had a chance to test it before putting payment down..I quickly found out A....IS is killer, I am spoiled by the IS on my other lenses,
B... its going to be a killer nite and Video lens!
thank you for the great reviews!
Nice review, i bought this lens a couple months ago, just before you uploaded the video i guess. It's an awesome lens, and even though its heavy and it doesn't have IS, the image quality and bokeh are superb. I use it mainly for video on a tripod, so the lack of IS isn't a very big deal. When using it for photos, it's still a great performer, particularly if you are taking pictures outdoors during the day and can use fast shutter speeds (1/320 or more when you are @200mm).
Lastly, one curious thing about this lens is that it's THE ONLY "PARFOCAL" 70-200 zoom in Canon's L line, even the newer IS and IS II zooms aren't parfocal, so i you want to zoom in while recording video, those more modern lenses won't keep the focus like the old one... interesting fact right? It seems that this is the only non-cine Canon Lens that can help you with those spaghetti western zoom ins :).
Hello, which one is better? This or the canon 100-400 Mk1? Im going to change my 70-200 because I want more zoom, but im afraid of the sharpness and higher F.
Well, it's up to you, really! You should also consider either the new Tamron or Sigma 100-400 lenses
I just got one for 280 bucks and it's great on my r7
Do you use IBIS mate? What's the result cause I am considering one for my R7 too.
I just bought the same one last Monday I got it for $350 AND I LOVE IT
Did you like the this non is version lens? I am also geeting one soon price as same as yours. Just afraid its not good like others
Best review yet... All other reviews talk about how great this lens is... It's not all that and a bag of chips. I'm almost sorry I bought it but it does serve it's need fairly well when I do use it. I find that at 200mm it is too soft for my taste. I get better images from my Canon sx40 at 500mm. Way to much money for what this lens is and does. Great review.
Hey guys, I am kinda new to photography with 1 year of experience and I want to ask, is it still worth it in 2022?
Yes, takes beautiful portrait pictures with my EOS R! But avoid pointing at direct sunlight as mentioned in the video. Cheers.
@@MohondhaY thank u mate, cheers
nice sir
Please make a review of the 70 - 200 is Mark ii. Vast improvements in respect to the optics and their performance has been made in the meantime. Would love to see your analysis on the newest version
I'm not sure the newer L f/2.8 are actually any better. The IS L lenses add another optical element in the way so instead of 4 optical elements you now have 5 in the newer lenses. This means that the light transmission is less and there's going to be more diffraction. Realistically I think Canon made a really good lens which is hard to beat. 70-200mm f/2.8 USM is still state of the art from an optics standpoint.
HI Chris, Love your videos. I need some advice. I am in dilemma whether to buy the 70-200 F2.8 NON IS for outdoor and Indoor portraits or events. My main concern is the NON IS, will that hamper me taking sharp images at 200mm? Cheers Sameer
Of course, like in any lens in the world, it's harder to take sharp telephoto pictures without image stabilization
@Christopher Frost newer mirror less cameras comes with IBIS. Is this a good deal for such cameras.
thnx for the review. i dont regret buying my canon 70-200 f4 IS L.
using the 70-20 2.8is II , i almost never have an problems with flare, using sunhood and no uv fliter :)
Nice review Christopher and very helpful too! I'm just thinking to buy canon 70-200mm F4 lens, don't have a budget for IS. But you mentioned that Tamron have some good lens. Can you do some review of Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lens???
What do you mean?! The Canon 60D has an 18 megapixel sensor...that's not exactly old and decrepit, and it was Canon's highest resolution APS-C sensor until only a few weeks ago when the 70D came out...and that's only a 20 megapixel sensor.
Thank you for another excellent review!
Can you review the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 Di VC?
I love your videos, they are very complete and professionally made.
It would be great if you review someday the Sigma and Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses. A lot of photographers would really appreciate it, as they are way cheaper than Canon version.
In 2021 would you pay €380 for this lens? A used one has popped up in my local listings and it feels like a decent deal for an amateur photographer to test out the 70-200 range without spending a ton for the newer IS options...
An excellent review. Thank you very much.
Hi Christopher, Thank you for your spectacular reveiw of the 70-200mm f2.8. What lens would you recommend similar to this one that would be suited for indoor sports photography (i.e. basketball games)? On a budget of course.
Probably this very lens is your best bet!
Thinking about the canon 70-200 2.8 IS version one it's cheaper now since the mark II came out.
I've heard it's a lot better, but it still has its problems compared to a 70-200 f/4
This lens would fit to any canon camera?thanks for the answer
Thanks for the review, can you please review canon 70-200 2.8 IS II or iii?
Would love to see a review of this lens with the newer cameras. I want to get a 70-200mm but i also don't want to spend too much money. So since this one is old i would like to see if it's still worth it
I have the same questions. I actually just bought this lens and I use a Canon EOS R. This camera should compensate for what this lens lacks.
.
Message me @shawntheluck on Instagram if you want to see things go when I get the lens
Take a look at the F4 version with IS. Damn good lens and reasonably priced.
@Shawn Covington you didn't mention what lenses you use on your insta, brother.
I just bought this lens for $405. I'll wait another few years then unload this one and upgrade to the iii after the RF ii is released.
Love your videos my friend, this is the 5th lens I've bought because of you but please take no offense... I disagree with you on the part about working against bright light. Expect when you have sun directly in your face, what happens to your eyes? They get hazy and down right too bright and our eyes are like ISO80 in the day and ISO 12800 at night HAHAHA. But overall I've tested this lens before getting it, it takes extremely well in bright conditions... HOWEVER, I don't wont be using this on a canon body, these lenses shine on Sony's. I still have my Canon 55-250mm lens and it takes like a pro lens.
Thank you for the review! I find them all very useful.
I just recently upgraded from my Canon T6s on to a Canon 6D mk ii and now I would like to get a 70-200 lens.
Are there any other options you could suggest as an alternative to the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark I ? Maybe with newer optics?
Loads of options. The Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD lens (the older and the newer version) are very good
if i want the depth of the field on the 70-200m of a soccer game should i put on wide focus or manual focus for filming
Hello Christopher.
Can you please test the Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 APO EX DG OS HSM?
I'm curious to learn more about this lens!
Davey Anthony that's the one I want, my brother has it and sais it's better than canon
Hi, you mentioned using a circular polarizer on this lens... what has been your experience using a cpol on longer focal lengths such as this lens?
i have noticed extremely blurry and distorted images at focal lengths ranging 50mm+
Blurry and distorted? That won't be your polarizer (unless it's broken)
Can get this lens for about 400£, and the 2.8 IS version of it for 650£...The MK2 version is too expensive...takes over 1100£.....
Which one do you recommend? I want to pair it with my 6D...
The F4 IS version is also about 600£, but I want to shoot some portraits so maybe 2.8 is better?
2.8 is better for portraits. It's probably worth saving up for image stabilization
Bạn có thể đánh giá lại ống kính này trên mô hình mới của bạn để rõ ràng độ nét được không?
Hi Christ , I’m deciding to buy this one or 4L Is I don’t really care much about contrast, because I can adjust that in Lightroom anyway, what I want to ask you is between 2.8 non Is and f4L Is Is there much different in sharpness when they shot at the same aperture like f4 ? Also I can get the 2.8 one at $850 and 4l IS at $790. Thank you in advance
PS. Which one you suggest ?
what happen if i use it on my 600D? the picture quality will remain same?
+Wink & Blush Wedding Sure
Well obviously that's just for the video. I'm using my Canon 60D to film the shot.
it is exactly same price as the tarmon 70-200 f2.8 vc version..at USA.
so I think most people perhaps will buy the tarmon over this.
Found this lens on Facebook market place for 300usd , physically it looks good but there’s fungus on the glass .. is it worthy to still get it and have it professionally cleaned ?
Hey Chris! I love your reviews. I watched some reviews which do not recommend full frame (L lenses) for APS-C cameras and question the picture quality, specifically the sharpness is compromised. I have 70D and want to buy 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. You have reviewed the non-IS version. Would you please do a review of IS version of 70-200mm f/2.8 L Lens on APS-C like your 60D or else. It would be great help in my decision and would help many. Thanks
The lens /should/ be pretty good, although I haven't tested it myself
I know this is a 2 years old comment but anyway...I have the 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM, first version. It's a great lens, but on my 24Mp APS-C the picture is slightly soft at f2.8, I kinda have to stop it down to f4. No problems on a 5Dii. Prices on Ebay for this lens are very good nowadays, I think it is a good investment, but only if you use both full frame and aps-c cameras.
I saw this on a old canon dx1 that might not work. Probably worth grabbing it and not saying what it is. 😂. If I did a strobe frame or tiny tripod, as a pistol grip, I wonder how it would be handheld
Im talking about the camera you have in the video, you know the one the lens is mounted on.
Can you do a review for the 70-200mm IS II? Do you recommend the V1 IS for 60D? I'm new to the photography realm. I am debating the 70-200 mm f/4 IS vs the 70-200 mm f/2.8 IS I or II. What are your thoughts?
I will be traveling to Europe for a wedding (not as the official photographer). I have currently the 60D, 24-105 mm f/4 IS L, and the 50mm f/1.8 prime, and awaiting the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.
Big Fan BTW. Really appreciate your canon lenses' reviews.
Clinnt Favo Personally, I'd go for the f/4 IS version, just for the lightness and convenience of the lens. But if you need f/2.8 then they're all good, with the Mark ii version being the best, obviously ;-)
I found a deal where the difference of 70-200mm f/2.8 IS V1 and a 70-200mm f/4 IS is about 300. What are your thoughts on that? It's used, however it still is immaculate. I spoke to both owners and they've just upgraded to the 70-200 mm IS II.
Clinnt Favo Weighing things up I'd say it's an even choice really, at that price difference. Personally I'd be tempted by the f/4 just for lightness and convenience, but having f/2.8 available is attractive, too.
Christopher Frost Photography Thank you for the tip. Yes the f/2.8 is tempting.
What about the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM (the first IS Version)? I almost can't find any videos or information to compare with the non-IS version. Many claim that the non-IS is sharper, but even if that is true, isn't the IS worth about €100 more?
Bryan from The Digital Picture has compared them I think
Christopher Frost Photography Thank you, I'll check it out. Have to say I love your reviews, keep it up and thank you.
Thanks for the review.
If I want to buy a lens for indoor sports. Do you think a used one of this at around 550 pound, will it be the right choice?
Sounds like a very good deal
Anything with EF or EFS fits in rebel t7 please I need an answer 🌐
I have found someone who is offering this lens for around $120. Do you think I should get this?
They're almost certainly ripping you off somehow - it probably doesn't work properly
The lens says 70-200mm f/2.8 .. Does it mean that when i zoom, the aperture doesn't get smaller? Or does it still increase when i zoom? Because if not, that would be nice, to have a small aperture even if it's zoomed in. Sorry, i'm still learning. :)
+John Paul Cabangis That's right, the aperture can remain as wide as f/2.8. If it got darker then it would say "f/2.8-4" or "f/4-5.6", for example
Is 70-200mm f2.8L II USM still have a problem with the flare?
What happen if you use a 2.0 extender. Does the 2.8 becomes a real 5.6 and thus it would be perfect to get the extra reach and the f5.6 would be as sharp as the 5.6 without an extender (being given one loses a bit of sharpness because of the extender) ? I would love to see a review on the canon extender by you, why because you are the best : )
+Dunkanz Dunkanz Haven't tried it. Not many people bother to use a 2.0x extender because there's a serious drop in sharpness. 1.4x might be okay
hi chris, which is ok for videography? this 70-200 f2.8 L or sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS?
I haven't tried that Sigma lens but the OS will help with handheld video work
thanks chris... but will the non-is canon 70-200 be fine with a tripod?
Anything is good with a decent tripod
thanks chris
Did you ever end up trying this lens with the 2x or 1.4x converters? If so, what were your thoughts on it?
No, never tried that
Seems like the 70-200 F/4 IS is a better choice then this for most.. I'm just wondering how the Sigma 70-200 2.8 stacks up..
It really comes down to your budget, if you need IS and if you need f/2.8 or not. When I originally bought this lens, I intended to use it for sports. I didnt need IS and F/4 would be a little slow. I wanted as fast a shutter speed as possible. I now have the 70-200 MK II
@EastEndery only on slow shutter speeds.
hi chris,.can u review the IS version of this lens..?
not mark ii version, . for me it's very expensive
thank a lot
No plans to, I'm afriad
What is the difference between this and the III?
will you please review tameron 70-200 f 2.8 both g1 and2
I hear it's good. Hopefully after Easter. Right now I have a whole tonne of other new lenses to get through
Plz advise me , which lens is better for every day Life Canon lens 18_200 or 18_135?
I'd personally go for the 18-135m STM - good value and image quality is good enough
Is it worth me spending an extra £100 to get this lens over the IS f/4?
Depends how much you think you'll need IS - if not, then get the f/2.8 version
Hi , thank you for the review , i need to ask you which better , canon 70-200 f4 is or 70-200 f2.8 ??Which important the IS or F ??
+Khaled Al Khder Depends what you need to do. Sports shooting or stopping action? Then f/2.8 might be better. Low light, indoors photography or landscape work? Then IS might be useful
+Christopher Frost Photography I want it for sport and stopping action
f/2.8 then
Is this good for wedding video?
I have the canon 300v how much does it Cost ?
Thanks
Important information.
Have you compared this (2.8II) to an 85 prime, or 100 or 135 f2?
This isn't the 2.8II. No, I haven't made any comparison videos of that nature
Will this lens work on the canon 6d?
Yup. I didn't have the 6D when I tested this though
+Christopher Frost Photography (Canada) it gets really cold here in winter, I don't know you've shot in -40 temperatures but if I'm shooting outside in the cold, does the focus ring get stuck? Or will I just have to find out. Sorry for random question.
Haha no idea I'm afraid! My guess is that it will still work, if your camera still works at that temperature. Be careful though, it's made of metal so it'll be really cold to touch. Also, be careful bringing your camera in from the cold into a warm place (e.g. indoors) - seal it in a plastic bag while it's still outside so it can warm up again safely without condensation
+Christopher Frost Photography yeah that's what I was thinking. My biggest concert is moisture getting under the lens and expanding when it freezes, damaging it. (What my original question should've been): How water tight is it?
I don't think it's watertight at all - I'm always meticulously careful not to get my gear wet though, so I might not be the person to ask! Even on a lens with major weatherproofing, condensation is a risk.
Haha I’m not desperate for a blurry background. I’m desperate for a clear, vibrant foreground haha. I probably should have bought a cheaper lens lol.
I bought a full frame camera just for this lens.
nice review..
Do you have any plans on buying a newer camera im thinking your camera isnt good enough for the quality of the glass you have. Not trying to offend you or anything it just seems a shame to have such good glass on that camera. Great video actually all your vids are pretty good wish i could throw ou one of my bodies lol. Keep it up.
Is it still worth if I buy this lens for used $580? Im going to put it on my Canon 77D
If it's in good condition, that sounds like a good deal
Christopher Frost Photography Thankyou! Yes it is in good condition. :)
I think u have saved me some money
So Nice Videos ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
Holy cow you sound like Richard Dawkins! Great review btw.
can we still get "creamy bokeh" with 70-200mm f/4.0L ? I like to shoot at night
what is a baca?
TheAlohaRobert its called bokeh, and its when the light behind a subject is blurred.
tired of that red house. gonna need some shots of more people
Got this lens for 520 euro's verry happy with it :D only asham i didn't got the tripod ring :c
Dwight Smith I thin kyou might of got ripped off and gotten the f/4 because the f/2.8 it comes with the tripod ring and the f4 doesn't
smart man
I just got this lens. I should have had seen this review before buying it. This review made me feel stupid.
can u tell us why?
IS maybe
canon lens in a nikon case :D
i know this is 10 yrs old but I have no idea why you'd recommend someone to get a 50 1.8 if they're looking for bokeh. The whole point of a telephoto is THE ZOOM. Ever have to stand 50 ft. away from the action? This is why you'd want this lens.