October 01, 2014, 11:23:03 AM

Author Topic: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime  (Read 7099 times)

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2011, 02:45:25 PM »

Actually, in terms of IQ at least, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II does beat the 200mm f/2.8L II prime.  Of course, there are costs in terms of size, weight, and actual cost for that slight IQ benefit. 


I have both and if you want f/2.8 at 200mm, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is the way to go. If it is IQ is top priority and the f/2.8 isn't so critical then the 70-300L is worth a visit.

If you want a light lens to swing around all day then the lightness of the 200 f/2.8 is the way to go

All lens are very good to excellent in the field
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 02:47:27 PM by briansquibb »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2011, 02:45:25 PM »

AJ

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 410
    • View Profile
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2011, 12:25:54 AM »
I own a 200/2.8 and 1.4x and 2x converters.

The lens by itself is very sharp.  With 1.4x it's still quite good.  Stopping down to f/5.6 helps.  I haven't had much luck with the 2x TC.

In all it's a setup capable of producing good or great photos, but without zoom or stabilization it's not user friendly.  A 100-400L IS would definitely be a lot easier to work with.

shermanstank

  • Guest
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2011, 01:09:09 AM »
I have both the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and 200 2.8L II prime.  I absolutely love both of them. The image quality are about the same and the 70-200 wins in its flexibility and low light image stabilization. BUT   the 200 2.8L II prime has its place.  It is very light weight and it is especially useful when you have to be discreet with your equipment.  The 70-200 attracts too much attention from would be thieves; the 200 prime is perfect if you want to be low key at certain situations. Remember every lens has its use. Think of it as one of the many brushes a painter uses to create art. IMHO

Cheers,

Sherwin
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 01:52:21 AM by shermanstank »

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4103
    • View Profile
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2011, 01:55:03 PM »
I never own 200mm prime, but I LOVE LOVE 70-200mm f2.8 IS II. I have version I and decided to upgrade version II, due to $300 instant rebate from Canon plus $100 from B&H ($400 of saving, $1974 plus free shippping)

I use it on my 60d, results are GREAT, even at f2.8.

On 5D II, which I'm borrowing from a friend, this lens creates SUPER blur background.

I plan to buy a used 5D II for now, until 5D III comes out.

Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

tobiasg@gmail.com

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2011, 03:42:43 PM »
I don't want to hijack this thread but do folks think the new pricing on the 70-200 is here to stay or will it likely be rising in the near future.  Love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks!

cheeseheadsaint

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2011, 05:13:06 PM »
^I've been looking at many price graphs and all have the pattern of being super low between the day after thanksgiving to christmas before skyrocketing back up again... until the next year when it goes super low again.

I think the price is going to rise but whether it will dips as deep next Christmas, I'm wondering the same thing.
Canon Rebel XSi, kit lens, 50mm f1.8, ef-s 55-250mm IS, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, 6D

Edwin Herdman

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 543
    • View Profile
Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2011, 11:12:30 PM »
I own the 70-200 2.8 IS II and it's a fine lens-no doubt about that. But nothing beats an L prime IMO. They're fine as.

Actually, in terms of IQ at least, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II does beat the 200mm f/2.8L II prime.  Of course, there are costs in terms of size, weight, and actual cost for that slight IQ benefit.
Sharpness only, or defocus area quality?  The 200mm f/2.8 prime might not be as sharp but it may have better boke (or not) - just asking, because I don't know for sure (I could run to Photozone, but eh...)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2011, 11:12:30 PM »