Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 20, 2013, 08:14 PM   #1
I AM THE MAN
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
70-200mm f/2.8 IS Question

Hey everyone! Just had a question on the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens. I'm gradually getting into Freelance Photography and I'm looking forward to buying a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS. The thing I'm stuck between is whether to buy the first version of the lens or the newest version (II version).

I can find the I version for about $1450 while I know someone selling the II version for $2000. Both lenses are "like new."

As far as budget goes, I'm not really on a budget as I can afford both lenses in a month's time but I'm not sure if it's worth spending the extra $550 for the II version. Any thoughts on the situation?

I currently have the 70-200mm f/4 NON IS version and I love the lens but I want something with a wider aperture so I can actually use for indoor parties, etc.


Thanks for all the help in advance.
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 20, 2013, 09:04 PM   #2
Bear
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sol III - Terra
I will point out that with the current instant rebate you can get the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM for $2200 from your choice of several reputable dealers. And then you will be getting it with a full Canon warranty.
__________________
-----Bear
Bear is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 20, 2013, 10:02 PM   #3
I AM THE MAN
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear View Post
I will point out that with the current instant rebate you can get the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM for $2200 from your choice of several reputable dealers. And then you will be getting it with a full Canon warranty.
That is true, but I'm just not sure if it is justifiable in spending that extra money to buy a II version.
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 20, 2013, 10:28 PM   #4
AxisOfBeagles
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: East of Shangrila
Can't speak to the I, but I've rented and used the II twice now - and am in love with it, especially for action photography. I'm choosing to save up and spend the extra bucks for the II, simply because I know how good it is.
__________________
Once you can accept the universe as being something expanding into an infinite nothing which is something, wearing stripes with plaid is easy
AxisOfBeagles is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 20, 2013, 10:41 PM   #5
DesterWallaboo
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Western USA
The Mark I has issues with back focusing... this is one of the big things they fixed in the Mark II. There are other enhancements as well, but that was the big one that everyone complained about.
DesterWallaboo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 20, 2013, 11:53 PM   #6
I AM THE MAN
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisOfBeagles View Post
Can't speak to the I, but I've rented and used the II twice now - and am in love with it, especially for action photography. I'm choosing to save up and spend the extra bucks for the II, simply because I know how good it is.
Nice! Hopefully I can make my mind up I'm going crazy on deciding haha!

Quote:
Originally Posted by DesterWallaboo View Post
The Mark I has issues with back focusing... this is one of the big things they fixed in the Mark II. There are other enhancements as well, but that was the big one that everyone complained about.
Oh ok! I mean my 70-200 f/4 has the back focusing problem and every once in awhile I do miss a few good shots because of it. Do you know any other?

Also, does anyone know how the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is?
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 12:17 AM   #7
OreoCookie
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Why don't you keep the f/4 and get one or two good primes instead? They're at least one stop faster (f/1.8 or f/2) than either of the f/2.8 zooms and they complement your kit. They're also lighter.
__________________
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
OreoCookie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 12:23 AM   #8
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Mark I is not as sharp as the Mark II, and flares a lot more.
Mark II has quieter, less jittery IS with one more stop of stabilization.

If you don't mind its weight, and by the looks of it you won't, the Mark II is what one would call a perfect lens. It's very hard to find any flaws about it. If you nitpick, you'll find subtle shortcomings with the Mark I but for its price I'd say it's worth it still.

In the end it's whether you're prepared to compromise.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 12:26 AM   #9
scottgoh
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
i got the mark 2 because i do not have to get another prime 200L 2.8 as the mark 2 is sharp at 200 at 2.8.
__________________
Website, Blog
South Australia Wedding and Newborn Photographer, iMac27" 2012
scottgoh is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 07:26 AM   #10
/"\/oo\/"\
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
The short list from I to II has been covered- no back focus issue, improved IS and improved sharpness...I'll add to that the mark II works very nicely with either of the mark III teleconverters if you see yourself needing something in that range.

If you can afford it comfortably and you're making money from it, I'd go for the II...it's a fantastic lens.
/"\/oo\/"\ is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 09:17 PM   #11
I AM THE MAN
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Why don't you keep the f/4 and get one or two good primes instead? They're at least one stop faster (f/1.8 or f/2) than either of the f/2.8 zooms and they complement your kit. They're also lighter.
Honestly I already a 50mm f/1.4 and that does me enough justice for now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prodo123 View Post
Mark I is not as sharp as the Mark II, and flares a lot more.
Mark II has quieter, less jittery IS with one more stop of stabilization.

If you don't mind its weight, and by the looks of it you won't, the Mark II is what one would call a perfect lens. It's very hard to find any flaws about it. If you nitpick, you'll find subtle shortcomings with the Mark I but for its price I'd say it's worth it still.

In the end it's whether you're prepared to compromise.
I see thank you! Do you know anything about the Tamron 70-200? Looks like a great lens from the reviews I've heard and it's much cheaper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottgoh View Post
i got the mark 2 because i do not have to get another prime 200L 2.8 as the mark 2 is sharp at 200 at 2.8.
Quote:
Originally Posted by /"\/oo\/"\ View Post
The short list from I to II has been covered- no back focus issue, improved IS and improved sharpness...I'll add to that the mark II works very nicely with either of the mark III teleconverters if you see yourself needing something in that range.

If you can afford it comfortably and you're making money from it, I'd go for the II...it's a fantastic lens.
I do want to make money in the upcoming months. As far as affordability goes, it definitely wouldn't be "comfortable" spending $600 extra dollars but if the features aren't really that improved. However, I do think the back-focusing fix is a huge plus. It's just soo hard to decide haha but thank you very much for your output!
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 09:38 PM   #12
mtbdudex
macrumors 68000
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE Michigan
What I love about my f2.8 70-200 MkII is the ability to use TC's!

Need the occasional 400mm shot at f5.6? Put a 2xTC on it.
Need more aperture? Then f4 at 280 via 1.4TC.
Heck, 560mm with 8.0 f stop ain't so bad either if you stack a 1.4 and 2.0 TC

I've used the above combos for bird watching, dolphin watching, etc.

Of course the 70-200 f2.8 for sports, indoor/outdoor is great also.

btw, what camera body are you shooting with?
(Hint, I've seen you here long enough, put your gear in your signature )
I've had my T1i since Oct-2009 and am looking a FF as next step, either a 6D or 5D.
Obvious benefits being low light/high ISO ability, which may suit your needs.
__________________
Mike R, P.E. ;iMac 27"(i7), iPad2, iPhone5s, 24" iMac, TV(160)
Canon: 70D+lens:70-200 L f2.8 IS II/TC 1.4x 2x/15-85/f1.4 50;580EX II,FEISOL tripod CT-3441S
DIY acoustic panels. . .HT Project
mtbdudex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 11:46 PM   #13
I AM THE MAN
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post
What I love about my f2.8 70-200 MkII is the ability to use TC's!

Need the occasional 400mm shot at f5.6? Put a 2xTC on it.
Need more aperture? Then f4 at 280 via 1.4TC.
Heck, 560mm with 8.0 f stop ain't so bad either if you stack a 1.4 and 2.0 TC

I've used the above combos for bird watching, dolphin watching, etc.

Of course the 70-200 f2.8 for sports, indoor/outdoor is great also.

btw, what camera body are you shooting with?
(Hint, I've seen you here long enough, put your gear in your signature )
I've had my T1i since Oct-2009 and am looking a FF as next step, either a 6D or 5D.
Obvious benefits being low light/high ISO ability, which may suit your needs.
Haha it's a small world! And I'm planning on using the 70-200 with a 5D Mark 2. Never actually knew you could stack up on TCc btw (I'm still an amateur).
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 01:37 AM   #14
OreoCookie
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by I AM THE MAN View Post
Honestly I already a 50mm f/1.4 and that does me enough justice for now.
A 85 mm or 135 mm prime would not be a replacement for a 50 mm prime whereas you propose to exchange one 70-200 mm lens for another.
__________________
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
OreoCookie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 04:16 AM   #15
steveash
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
From a purely business point of view, the Mark 1 lens will be fine and your clients won't notice the difference.

From a photographers point of view, the Mark 2 has considerable improvements and is generally considered one of the best lenses money can buy. If you don't get it you may well regret it in the future. But as I said, don't expect your clients to notice the difference!
__________________
My 500px portfolio
steveash is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 08:16 AM   #16
Kebabselector
macrumors 68020
 
Kebabselector's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Birmingham, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by I AM THE MAN View Post
Never actually knew you could stack up on TCc btw (I'm still an amateur).
Don't expect the camera to autofocus if you stack TC's (unless you have a 1D)
__________________
Mac Mini 1.66Ghz/2gb - 2.3/i5/8gb - MacBook 2.0Ghz/2gb
iPhone 6 64gb - iPad Mini Retina 16gb wifi
Others: Canon Eos Stuff - Passat B6 - Smeg - Firewire devices - Prefers Matte
Kebabselector is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 11:13 AM   #17
MCAsan
macrumors 68030
 
MCAsan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta
5DIII does AF at F8 with latest firmware upgrade. I can shoot my 5dIII with 100-400 at 400 with 1.4TC with a total length of 560. The AF will use the center point which is fine for me with shooting wildlife. While it is not as good a 500 prime or one of the new 200-400, it is a cost effective option.
__________________
Retina MBP 11,3 2.6GHz | 16GB | 1TB
Thunderbolt Display
iPhone 6 | Silver | 128GB | Unlocked
iPad Air 2 | Silver | 128GB | WiFi only
MCAsan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 08:23 PM   #18
I AM THE MAN
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveash View Post
From a purely business point of view, the Mark 1 lens will be fine and your clients won't notice the difference.

From a photographers point of view, the Mark 2 has considerable improvements and is generally considered one of the best lenses money can buy. If you don't get it you may well regret it in the future. But as I said, don't expect your clients to notice the difference!
Thank you very much for the advice!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kebabselector View Post
Don't expect the camera to autofocus if you stack TC's (unless you have a 1D)
Haha alright thank you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
A 85 mm or 135 mm prime would not be a replacement for a 50 mm prime whereas you propose to exchange one 70-200 mm lens for another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCAsan View Post
5DIII does AF at F8 with latest firmware upgrade. I can shoot my 5dIII with 100-400 at 400 with 1.4TC with a total length of 560. The AF will use the center point which is fine for me with shooting wildlife. While it is not as good a 500 prime or one of the new 200-400, it is a cost effective option.
Sorry for bringing up another question, but does anyone have any experience with the 70-200mm f/2.8 NON IS? I found a guy who is willing to trade his f/2.8 NON IS for my f/4 NON IS and $450. Is it a good deal? Is it too good of a deal? Anything I should be on the lookout for?

I'm thinking I could go for the f/2.8 NON IS for now then eventually upgrade to the IS version (maybe even a MKII). Any insight on this idea?

Thank you very much once again for all your answers!
__________________
Canon 5D Mark II w/ 70-200mm f/2.8 NON IS L, 24-70mm f/2.8 L II, 50mm f/1.4, 28-135mm
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 09:21 PM   #19
mtbdudex
macrumors 68000
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Some extreme TC stacking, 4368mm ..300mm f2.8 x 2TC x 2TC x 2TC x 1.4TC x 1.3 APS-H.. (not mine)
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/39779646


Here is my 560mm stacking:
__________________
Mike R, P.E. ;iMac 27"(i7), iPad2, iPhone5s, 24" iMac, TV(160)
Canon: 70D+lens:70-200 L f2.8 IS II/TC 1.4x 2x/15-85/f1.4 50;580EX II,FEISOL tripod CT-3441S
DIY acoustic panels. . .HT Project
mtbdudex is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 09:49 PM   #20
OreoCookie
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fukuoka, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by I AM THE MAN View Post
Sorry for bringing up another question, but does anyone have any experience with the 70-200mm f/2.8 NON IS? I found a guy who is willing to trade his f/2.8 NON IS for my f/4 NON IS and $450. Is it a good deal? Is it too good of a deal?
I think you're really overthinking this, I get the impression that you think that your livelihood will depend on getting the Mark II once you make the hobby into your profession. This is completely false. In truth, none of your clients will care whether you use a Mark I or a Mark II -- or whether you opt for a Tamron 70-200 mm f/2.8 instead. What matters is whether the lens has the capabilities you need for you to make the shot. The Mark I was and is a great lens, but of course, the natural enemy of the good is the better. That doesn't meant you won't be able to make good shots with something other than the Mark II.

Honestly, I think you should decide for yourself whether you need the additional f-stop, and you can do that by taking shots with your existing f/4 wide open. There are a few aspects that haven't been mentioned but that are IMHO very important. (For the record, I'm a Nikon shooter, but I do own a 80-200 mm f/2.8 for 6 years.)
(1) Weight: the f/2.8 version weighs about twice as much as your f/4. For that reason alone, I often prefer primes indoors.
(2) Depth of field: towards the longer end, your depth of field will be in the range of <+/- 3 cm, and you may have to stop down because otherwise only one eye is in focus and the other is not.
(3) Choice of focus sensor: Initially I used the 80-200 mm on my D80 (I have since upgraded to a D7000), and in dim lighting, I could often only use the center AF point for reliable focussing. Given that you have a 5D Mark II with a similarly ancient AF system, this is also a concern. Keep in mind that it's much easier to nail focus on an f/4 lens than on a f/2.8 lens (smaller depth of field means it is harder to achieve focus). (I don't want to start an old discussion again about the quality of the AF module of the 5D Mark II, I'm just speaking from my own experience here.)

For these reasons, I recommended having a look at keeping the f/4 and getting two additional prime lenses instead (e. g. the 85 mm f/1.8 and the 135 mm f/2 or a Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 and a 100 mm macro). Alternatively, you can also make the trade for the f/2.8 non-IS and purchase additional lenses instead from the money that you have saved. I don't think you need the Mark II for now, getting one now is not a sensible business decision in my opinion. Lenses retain value incredibly well, so you can always sell the non-IS f/2.8 later and upgrade to the Mark III when it comes out
__________________
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
OreoCookie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2013, 08:03 AM   #21
I AM THE MAN
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post
Some extreme TC stacking, 4368mm ..300mm f2.8 x 2TC x 2TC x 2TC x 1.4TC x 1.3 APS-H.. (not mine)
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/39779646
Image

Here is my 560mm stacking:
Image
Haha both look incredible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I think you're really overthinking this, I get the impression that you think that your livelihood will depend on getting the Mark II once you make the hobby into your profession. This is completely false. In truth, none of your clients will care whether you use a Mark I or a Mark II -- or whether you opt for a Tamron 70-200 mm f/2.8 instead. What matters is whether the lens has the capabilities you need for you to make the shot. The Mark I was and is a great lens, but of course, the natural enemy of the good is the better. That doesn't meant you won't be able to make good shots with something other than the Mark II.

Honestly, I think you should decide for yourself whether you need the additional f-stop, and you can do that by taking shots with your existing f/4 wide open. There are a few aspects that haven't been mentioned but that are IMHO very important. (For the record, I'm a Nikon shooter, but I do own a 80-200 mm f/2.8 for 6 years.)
(1) Weight: the f/2.8 version weighs about twice as much as your f/4. For that reason alone, I often prefer primes indoors.
(2) Depth of field: towards the longer end, your depth of field will be in the range of <+/- 3 cm, and you may have to stop down because otherwise only one eye is in focus and the other is not.
(3) Choice of focus sensor: Initially I used the 80-200 mm on my D80 (I have since upgraded to a D7000), and in dim lighting, I could often only use the center AF point for reliable focussing. Given that you have a 5D Mark II with a similarly ancient AF system, this is also a concern. Keep in mind that it's much easier to nail focus on an f/4 lens than on a f/2.8 lens (smaller depth of field means it is harder to achieve focus). (I don't want to start an old discussion again about the quality of the AF module of the 5D Mark II, I'm just speaking from my own experience here.)

For these reasons, I recommended having a look at keeping the f/4 and getting two additional prime lenses instead (e. g. the 85 mm f/1.8 and the 135 mm f/2 or a Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 and a 100 mm macro). Alternatively, you can also make the trade for the f/2.8 non-IS and purchase additional lenses instead from the money that you have saved. I don't think you need the Mark II for now, getting one now is not a sensible business decision in my opinion. Lenses retain value incredibly well, so you can always sell the non-IS f/2.8 later and upgrade to the Mark III when it comes out

Wow thank you very much. This actually gave me soo much more insight on what to purchase! I think for now I'll trade my f/4 for the 2.8 NON IS and then purchase the 24-70 f/2.8. When you say lens hold their value, I agree but I find it such a hard time to sell them (maybe because no one wants to buy a f/4 NON IS 70-200 :O ) Anyways once again thank you very much!


Thank you to everyone for the answers!
__________________
Canon 5D Mark II w/ 70-200mm f/2.8 NON IS L, 24-70mm f/2.8 L II, 50mm f/1.4, 28-135mm
I AM THE MAN is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2013, 01:42 PM   #22
ocabj
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by I AM THE MAN View Post
Hey everyone! Just had a question on the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens. I'm gradually getting into Freelance Photography and I'm looking forward to buying a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS. The thing I'm stuck between is whether to buy the first version of the lens or the newest version (II version).
Version II is significantly better when shooting wide open.

http://www.ocabj.net/sexy-glass-cano...-8l-is-ii-usm/
ocabj is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 10:03 AM   #23
ctyhntr
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Other options I would consider, such as taking a getting a refurb direct from Canon. They're around $1700. Also, have you looked Tamron and Sigma's70-200 f1.8 offerings? When Sigma came out with IS on their new 70-200 f2.8, Canon supposedly sued them.
ctyhntr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:23 PM   #24
MCAsan
macrumors 68030
 
MCAsan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta
Very hard to beat Tamron's SP (top line) 24-70 and 70-200 that are F2.8 with Vibration Control. Those are much less expense than Canon L lenses and as good. Read the reviews you can find on the net and magazines..


http://photo.net/equipment/tamron/70-200vc
__________________
Retina MBP 11,3 2.6GHz | 16GB | 1TB
Thunderbolt Display
iPhone 6 | Silver | 128GB | Unlocked
iPad Air 2 | Silver | 128GB | WiFi only
MCAsan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 07:13 PM   #25
cocky jeremy
macrumors 68040
 
cocky jeremy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Huntington, WV
Send a message via AIM to cocky jeremy Send a message via Skype™ to cocky jeremy
Mark II for sure. Sharper, more contrast, less CA. The 70-200 II is one of the nicest lenses Canon makes. Probably behind the 300 f/2.8 II and maybe a few others.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MCAsan View Post
Very hard to beat Tamron's SP (top line) 24-70 and 70-200 that are F2.8 with Vibration Control. Those are much less expense than Canon L lenses and as good. Read the reviews you can find on the net and magazines..


http://photo.net/equipment/tamron/70-200vc
I've seen comparisons, and the Tamron doesn't touch the Canon.
__________________
 27" iMac. 3.4 GHz i5. 24 GB RAM. 512 GB SSD - 64 GB iPhone 6 Plus 
cocky jeremy is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is 200mm Enough? harleymhs Digital Photography 22 Apr 22, 2014 02:36 PM
Nikon 2.0x TC with 70-200mm F/2.8 VR II? avro707 Digital Photography 5 Sep 8, 2013 02:12 AM
The Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR II is a BEAST Razeus Digital Photography 5 Mar 13, 2013 10:09 PM
Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR John.B Digital Photography 4 Oct 27, 2012 03:51 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:08 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC