EF 70-200 f/2.8L II Horror Stories

[BozillaNZ]

I have nothing bad to say about this lens. It's amazing. But for a horror story(Human error) very shortly after I bought my lens I placed it in my camera bag quickly and the lens cap pushed against the edge too hard and popped off and tapped the lens element. Luckily it didn't scratch the element but the coating has a small pen size dot on it. Doesn't show up in pictures at all so most of my worry is gone. But man my heart dropped thinking "If I scratched this... :-\ "

Go get yourself a B+W Nano UV, this lens deserves it.

 

[lucuias]

Beside weight and price.This is an amazing lens

Great shot! I really like this close-up, but the subject's skin look kinda "plastic", or unnaturally smooth at best. Did you do some heavy photoshopping on this one? if so, it really shows. Otherwise, the rendering seems to indicate that the protagonists have been dipped in resin just prior to the photo session, which would be fine for a Barbie commercial. (sorry if my comment appears sarcastic, that's not the intention, I think this is a great work apart from the skin rendition)

back to the original post: I went through many user's reviews when I had to pick my next telephoto lens, and so far I haven't read anything negative about the 70-200L/2.8 beside its weight. I ultimately went for the 70-300L because of its lower weight (i.e. portability), longer range and better rendering at the longer end than the 70-200L/2.8 with TC. If you don't mind the weight and shorter range and need a shallower DoF, then the 70-200L/2.8 is definitely the sure thing.

Yes,the skin was heavily smoothen via post(NIK)

I actually like the look, looks like CGI in a video game. How did you achieve it?

I light it with 60x60cm softbox and smoothen the skin using Nik colour effect pro.

Here are the metadata:-
Camera: Canon
Model: Canon EOS 5D Mark III
ISO: 200
Exposure: 1/200 sec
Aperture: 5.0
Focal Length: 150mm

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I have nothing bad to say about this lens. It's amazing. But for a horror story(Human error) very shortly after I bought my lens I placed it in my camera bag quickly and the lens cap pushed against the edge too hard and popped off and tapped the lens element. Luckily it didn't scratch the element but the coating has a small pen size dot on it. Doesn't show up in pictures at all so most of my worry is gone. But man my heart dropped thinking "If I scratched this... :-\ "

Canon objective lenses (the front element) are a lot tougher than people give them credit for. Generally they are tougher than any filter placed in front of them. I generally prefer a hood than a filter for protection, filters degrade quality, cause unwanted ghosts and reflections and increase flare. The best protection IMHO is to use a great big plastic wrap around it...ie the supplied hood. It's a pity the current mkII just missed out on the new flourine coatings!

 

[nicku]

Nice pics lucuias....

 

[insanitybeard]

Why do people ignore the 70-200mm f/4 IS? It is stunningly sharp, almost as sharp as the "best" f/2.8s, and a fraction of the weight and price.

Indeed, and those are the reasons why I own the f4 IS- less bulky and heavy than the 2.8, so good for travel, almost as good or as good optically and a lot less money! I couldn't justify the expense of the 2.8 but the f4 gives me most of the 2.8's performance with the exception of the max. aperture. Having said that, sometimes it would be nice to have the extra reach of the 70-300L in a single lens.

 

[brett b]

I'm sorry for those that have had problems with this lens. It has been a go to lens for me.