70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime

[briansquibb]

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

[AJ]

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]

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

[Dylan777]

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.

[tobiasg@gmail.com]

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]

^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.

[Edwin Herdman]

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...)