Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L Non-IS to Be Discontinued in 2013 [CR2]

[Canon Rumors]

Tweet

Time’s up
The Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS is set to be discontinued officially some time in 2013. As much as I think there is still a market for this lens with sports & wedding photographers with pro bodies with great high ISO performance, there’s no information saying Canon will do a version II of this lens.

In case you were wondering, the EF 70-200 f/4L is remaining current with no plans for a discontinuation.

Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS at B&H $1299

cr

[R1-7D]

Boo! I love this lens. It's superb for its price. Glad I picked one up last summer.

[Pinchers of Peril]

RIP little buddy!

[crasher8]

so, what's the market's track record for pricing on end of life L lenses? This one has always been on my radar (to replace the f/4 model) but 1300 is too close to Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC. If it drops before the big adios I might go for it.

[dhofmann]

I'm not surprised. An updated version of this lens would cost around $1600-1700. If you're paying that much, you might spend the extra few hundred for image stabilization.

[Stewbyyy]

I adore this lens. I haven't seen the point of the IS version for my uses since I always need a shutter speed fast enough to freeze the action.

I bought the 70-200mm F/4 IS and sold it after 2 weeks to buy the 2.8 non-IS. It's sad to see this lens be discontinued.

[JurijTurnsek]

canon is seriously blowing it. their lens choices really boggle me? I'd be willing to bet this lens was a very good seller

[scrup]

The lens is not cheap and most prefer the IS version.

Maybe a new version will be released at a higher price.

[preppyak]

canon is seriously blowing it. their lens choices really boggle me? I'd be willing to bet this lens was a very good seller

If it was a good seller they'd keep producing it...seeing as they already have all the infrastructure. in place to make it and it costs them nothing in R&D, etc to keep it going. My guess is that with a bunch of new super tele's ramping up, a new 24-70 to make, a bunch of new IS primes, etc, they need the production space from a lens that wasn't moving units. And discounting it by a few hundred bucks to move a bunch cuts margins too tight.

For someone who needs f/2.8, they may well just get the 85mm f/1.8, the 135L or the 200 f/2.8 (or a collection of those). Or just go with the pricier IS version if its their work. For anyone who doesn't need f/2.8, there's no reason to buy this lens over the f/4L IS, as that is cheaper, lighter, smaller filters...the list goes on.

It never really made sense to have 4 versions of the 70-200; I think the only reason the non-IS f/4 version is staying is because its cheap enough to sell well.

[SJTstudios]

I guarantee canon will give the 70-200 f4 is the 24-70 f4 is treatment, shorter, smaller, and perhaps even sharper than the 2.8 is ii, just a thought.
 I really think canon was smart with discontinuing it, I loved it, but the justification between this and the is ii, was the sharpness, and if someone didn't want to pay for the is ii, they'd be happy with the tamron or sigma.

R.I.P.
Canon 70-200 f2.8

[paul13walnut5]

@Preppyak

there's no reason to buy this lens over the f/4L IS, as that is cheaper, lighter, smaller filters...the list goes on.

The f4 is a stop slower at max aperture.

Thats a stop faster shutter with the f2.8, IS cannot do much about subject motion.

That's a stop lower ISO with the f2.8, IS cannot do much about image noise.

Thats shallower depth of field (if thats your thing) with the f2.8

Thats more versatility.

But most of all and best of all... with every EOS DSLR the AF has improved performance with f2.8 or faster lenses.

I don't want to slate the f4 IS as I gather if you shoot focus charts it's marginally sharper.  But contrary to your assertion, there are a few reasons to buy the f2.8 over the f4 IS, that make sense to some users.

It's a broad church and I'm not saying you are wrong, just that your reasons aren't right for me.

[preppyak]

It's a broad church and I'm not saying you are wrong, just that your reasons aren't right for me.

Fair enough, "need" was too strong, since there are a few reasons to go with the non-IS f/2.8. But, I would imagine it's a pretty limited user base, since we're only talking 1 stop of light, and the weight and size difference is pretty massive.

Which is more my point about it being niche and discontinued. Casual users who don't have a specific need for f/2.8 are going the f/4 route for size, weight and price reasons. Pros who need f/2.8 are probably justifying getting the IS II, because its the best there is. Leaves a small group left

[AG]

It never really made sense to have 4 versions of the 70-200; I think the only reason the non-IS f/4 version is staying is because its cheap enough to sell well.

Agreed.

If anything this may lead to the demise of the f4 non IS and then reduction in price for the IS version.
But from recent pricing i cant see that happening.

[killswitch]

Do you think the used market price for this lens will drop a bit more sooner than later or will the price remain the same for some time? I was just about to pull the trigger on one 70-200 f2.8L and the used market seems to be hovering around the 930-1050 ish price point right now.

[jdramirez]

I owned this lens for a few months... and I really liked it (I didn't love it for the price), but it is sad to see it go.  Maybe I'll get another just until I pony up the money for an IS mk ii version.