August 01, 2014, 11:30:54 PM

Author Topic: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L  (Read 10957 times)

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2013, 10:53:03 AM »
i do NOT recommend the 70 -300,
regarding the two 70-200s: both perform very good, so here it maybe is a budget-desicion as well, i'd slightly recommend the 2,8-version (really excellent), maybe keep the price you'll aceive if you sell it some years later in mind, if this helps to justify the priceTag. the 2,8 is a very good investment.

it's the best (canon) you can get, you'll have a  lot of fund wirking with it, and when selling it used.

best mv
Why canĀ“t you recommend the 70-300L? Since I am normally quite critical to my lenses and have been very happy so far, why are you so unhappy?
2x5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L II, 70-300/4-5.6L, 200-400/4L 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Sigma 35/1.4 Art, Sigma 50/1.4 Art, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, 85/1.2L II, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2013, 10:53:03 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13626
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2013, 10:59:10 AM »
i do NOT recommend the 70 -300 (img quality, speed),

Sorry, but...WTF?  I hope you are confusing the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (the mid-range consumer zoom from 2005) with the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM (professional lens from 2010) - we are disucssing the latter here, not the former.  If you don't recommend the 70-300 L for reasons of image quality, I'd be interested to know why you think that.  In the overlapping range, the 70-300L has better IQ than the 100-400L...
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

FEBS

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #17 on: September 26, 2013, 11:00:23 AM »
+1 for the 2.70-200mm f2.8L IS II

This is real versatile lens, very fast, good IQ and works fine with both extenders.

1Dx, 5D3, 7D, 300D, 14 2.8LII, 17-40 4.0L, 24 1.4LII, 24-105 4.0L, 50 1.4, 70-200 2.8LII,  85 1.8, 100 2.8Lmacro, 300 2.8LII, 1.4xIII, 2.0xIII, Yongnuo, CamRanger,..

Plinian

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #18 on: September 26, 2013, 11:23:25 AM »
I have both the f/2.8 and the f/4 versions of the 70-200 IS; I bought the f/4 when I was first starting out, and about a year later decided that I really wanted the flexibility of another stop (more on that below), thinking I would sell the f/4.

Both are fantastic in terms of IQ. The main advantages of the f/2.8 (for me) are AF in low-light conditions for moving subjects (large BIF) and extra reach. As someone else said, the 70-200 does very well with a 1.4x ii, and a little less well with the 2x but still acceptable.

Because of the weight advantage, I haven't gotten around to selling the f/4 yet, but I've also barely used it; in situations where there's a choice, I've always gone with the 2.8.

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1789
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #19 on: September 26, 2013, 11:44:22 AM »
I too have both the f/2.8 and the f/4 versions of the 70-200 IS. The f/4 is unbeatable for size/weight. Its IQ is also very good.

I used the 2.8 II only in one occasion where I needed the fastest possible 70-200 optic. That has given many good photos but except from such (and rare for me) special cases the f/4 is enough. I can even put my 5D(II or II), 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 IS in a small Thinktank Urban Disguise 30 and still have room for a small optic or flash.

The only thing that stops me from getting 70-300 is that the overlapping would be too much - and no I will NOT sell 70-200 f/4 IS - and the reverse use of focus and zoom rings.

To sum up: It seems difficult to choose. I would rank Nature People/pets Event and Travel categories and then choose accordingly.

albron00

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #20 on: September 26, 2013, 11:44:52 AM »
Personally for me the only downside for f/2.8 is the weight, while comparing to f/4.
I've found that I use more often f/4 only because of lightweight.
I take f/2.8 if I now that I'm gonna shoot in dark conditions or some kind of prepared event.
For 'just go and shoot' I prefer f/4.
Any lens is good as long as you have it in you bag with you.
This is my opinion.
I use them on 5DmIII


yablonsky

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #21 on: September 26, 2013, 11:50:05 AM »
I would recommend the 70-200 F/4 L IS.
It is my favorite lens! It is light and sharp.
Wonderful for travelling.
5D2, 17-40 4L, 24-70 2.8L II, 70-200 4L IS,  300 4L IS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #21 on: September 26, 2013, 11:50:05 AM »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #22 on: September 26, 2013, 11:54:24 AM »
Get the very best you can out of your cameras AF.  If money isn't the issue then get the f2.8.  Keeps all your options open regarding extenders and AF in the future and is the best of the bunch.

I don't see the point of spending this kind of money on a variable aperture f5.6 lens.  No matter how much lighter it is.

Don't want to lug a lot of gear around.  Buy a superzoom compact.


SwnSng

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #23 on: September 26, 2013, 11:59:01 AM »
the 70-200 2.8L is one amazing lens. I use it for pretty much everything. Event, Sports (boys soccer), Landscape, Nightscapes, and portrait. I can never not recommend this lens. If weight is too big of an issue for you, then perhaps go with the 70-300L.


ScottyP

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #24 on: September 26, 2013, 12:06:51 PM »
Get the 70-200 f2.8 II and ALSO the 1.4x tele extender and you have fewer compromises to get the same versatility.
Canon 6D; Canon Lenses: EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF 85 f/1.8; EF-S 17-55 f/2.8; Canon 1.4x Mk. III T.C.; Sigma Lens: 35mm f/1.4 "Art"

Steb

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #25 on: September 26, 2013, 12:07:16 PM »
As I have enough for the 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, this seemed like a no-brainer by reading all the rave reviews online. However, I tried it out in the store yesterday, and found it to be quite heavy compared to the 70-200mm f4L IS. I am afraid that I might buy it, but don't use it as much as it deserves because of lugging around a 1.4kg lens and a 0.7kg camera a full day might be quite tiresome on my arms and back.

In this case I would recommend to postpone the decision for one of those lenses and start with a 300mm f2.8 first. Use it for some time, then go and try the 70-200mm f2.8 again. It will feel like a toy.  ;D

Anyway, the 70-200/2.8 is one of my favorites and I would definitely miss the 2.8. Especially if you want to shoot people, f4 or slower would not be my first choice. If you go for a lighter solution you have to choose between constant aperture and more reach. The 70-300 is very compact compared to the internal zoom lenses. So if size is most important for you, this is the lens. I don't think there is much difference in IQ when you compare the 70-300 with the 70-200 f4.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2013, 11:14:47 AM by Steb »

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1176
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #26 on: September 26, 2013, 12:33:01 PM »
I have the 70-200/2.8L IS II, and it's an amazing and versatile lens.  For extra reach, it takes both the 1.4xIII and the 2xIII very well in terms of IQ.   However, as you say - it's heavy.  I also have the 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS, and that's the one I grab for travel.

+1.

I have the 70-200 II and I absolutely love it. Can't even think of replacing it with anything else. However, often I am not able to take it to places, and I end up without a long lens. It is expensive, big, conspicuous and heavy. So I shall have to get an additional lens for portability (probably the 135 f2). Please bear this in mind if you go for the 2.8 II
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 40mm f/2.8 STM, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3

TommyLee

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #27 on: September 26, 2013, 12:53:12 PM »
I say the 70-300L

a good range... and seems to be a sharp lens...I dont have it
had the non-L.... it was pretty good...even at 300mm.....but the range was VERY useful..
and it matched with a second (or third) lens for travel very well..

you seem to want reach... that 70-300L likely does better than most for that

I am SURE the 70-200 II is too heavy
IMO it is almost a specialized lens because of the weight.. it is a real fine optic and a problem solver...but is truly 'baggage' sometimes
unless that is specifically what you use and want regularly(does ok with 2xTC too)

frankly the 35L and 70-300 cover a lot ...
add a less expensive 14mm (I prefer the 14L II) and these three do a ton of work on a trip
(or a fisheye)
I wouldn't enter a big city - as a tourist - without 14mm or 16mm...... gets a tall building in a single bound...and if you have the 70-300, you can reach waayy up those bldgs and bridges...to grab a gargoyle...
---------

70-300L

Tom



canon rumors FORUM

Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #27 on: September 26, 2013, 12:53:12 PM »

chas1113

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #28 on: September 26, 2013, 08:54:44 PM »
It sounds like you're really debating between two lenses, not three. I traded up to a 70-300L from a 70-200 f/4 IS. Yes, up. After testing both side by side, color, clarity, contrast, IS, size (packed) was  better on my 70-300L. Both lenses are f/4 at 70mm and my 70-300L was sharper there. Both lenses are 5.6 at 280mm and my 70-300L was sharper there. One lens has snappier AF at a native 300mm, the other doesn't; one is sharper with no TC-induced flaring/veiling at 300mm, the other isn't.

Maybe my 70-200 f/4 IS was substandard (I don't think so), but my 70-300L was better at most things with no need for an extender. So I kept it instead. If you can test both side by side, that would be best. They are both very good lenses and choosing between them is very difficult.
5D III | 5DII | Fuji X-E1 | EF 17-40 | EF 24-105 | EF 35 IS | EF 50 f/1.4 | EF 100L | EF 70-300L | EF 100-300L | EF 300 f/4 IS

mwh1964

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 187
  • 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #29 on: September 26, 2013, 09:54:38 PM »
Got both 70-300L and 70-200 f2.8. Both are terrific lenses and you will be happy with both no matter which one you choose. However they sort of serve different purposes. If you are certain of no f2.8 need I would recommend the 70-300L. It is a very capable lens and the bokeh for some reviewers a rated better than the 2.8. I bring the 70-300 everywhere while I do consider if it is necessary to bring the f2.8. That might also give a hint. Good luck choosing.
5D3 | 24-70L II | 24-105L | 70-200L II | 70-300L | 15 fisheye | 35 IS | 40 STM | 50 f1.4 | 100L | 135 L | extender 2X III | B&W Kaesemann | 2 x 600 EX-RT | ST-E3-RT | MR14-EX | Manfrotto | Billingham | Lowepro | Think Tank

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Buying my first white lens: 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS or 70-300 f4-5.6L
« Reply #29 on: September 26, 2013, 09:54:38 PM »