Going to get the 24-70 2.8 II. Want a 70-200 as well

[surfer57]

I have a long lens for shooting from the beach already so the 70-200 wasn't going to fill that need, granted I do find myself pulled back to 200mm often for a more landscape style shot.

Instead of going longer after a bit of thinking for the future I instead went with the 16-35mm. I could use something wide as I only have a 10mm fisheye that I shoot with in the water on my 30D. In the future I'll be getting a housing for the 1Dx and the 16-35 is a great lens for in the water.

 

[RMC33]

If you are in the water often I would say that is a great investment. I find myself using my 70-200 mainly for kayaking, skateboarding, bmx and some skiing (I do some close quarters stuff too with an 8-15 fish) as the distances are not that great.

 

[ewg963]

Just pick up the non-IS version. It goes for $1200 right now. It's also arguably sharper than the II.

That's just plain wrong. I have had every version and can state categorically that the 70-200 2.8L IS II is far sharper than the non-IS version. Not even close.

This can also be verified at the Digital Picture.....
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=242&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Thanks for the info Harv. I have the 70-200mm 2.8 now I like the test results for the IS II

 

[Pixel]

Just pick up the non-IS version. It goes for $1200 right now. It's also arguably sharper than the II.

That's just plain wrong. I have had every version and can state categorically that the 70-200 2.8L IS II is far sharper than the non-IS version. Not even close.

This can also be verified at the Digital Picture.....
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=242&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Agreed, I wouldn't consider an original even if it were free. Go with the EF70-200 F4L IS until you can afford the 2.8.

 

[surfer57]

Got the lenses yesterday and am beyond happy with my choices. Just shooting around the house and the beach a bit the past two days. Super fast autofocus, quick to lock on in low light also. Feel so much better on the 1DX than my non L primes which were my go to's prior. Whether I get the 70-200 or a waterhousing for the 1DX next will depend on what the majority of my work is moving into the spring.

 

[acaurora]

One thing I don't see anyone suggesting here is to try using a lens rental service to see which works better for you - I use BorrowLenses.com but I know there are other services out there that you can try a lens out - it is how I came to determine I wanted the 70-200 f/2.8L II.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Agreed, I wouldn't consider an original even if it were free.

That's a bit extreme, isn't it? The Mark Is are excellent lenses- I just upgraded to the Mark II IS but I still like the background blur of my first one more. Wish I could post a comparison, but for some reason I can't upload anything to this site.
Besides, I bet IS wouldn't be of much help at the speeds one shoots surfing anyway.
Although I agree that in this case, f/4 IS would work fine- but after I tried the f/2.8 IS I was so smitten that I avoided buying the f/4 and waited to save up for the Mark I and then the Mark II.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Have the money to get the 24-70 2.8 II to pair with my 1Dx. It seems like a no brainer to me. I'll be using for event photography, portraits and will be getting into weddings. That said I'd really like to have a 70-200 as I love that range and use it often whether for surf photography or something else. Given the ISO performance on the 1Dx do I need IS (I really don't have enough money for the 2.8 IS II but may be able to swing the ver I)? Could I even go to f4 with good results or will I be spoiled by the sharpness of the 24-70?

200mm is a bit on the short side for surfing

 

[tomscott]

I have the 70-200mm L 2.8 non IS and it is wonderful but you do need to be careful. I have a pretty steady hand and have learned to get used to it and alter the shutter speed to compensate. I also use it with a 2x converter and get great results to reduce weight in the bag.


IMG_0474 by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Thats a shot I took for my local newspaper covering a new development with an old 40D and the 70-200 with a 2x MKII extender F8 1/640 ISO 200 at 400mm (or 640mm as it would be on a crop camera with the 2x)

But the IS is brilliant and if I could afford it would I get it!? Without doubt.

But in terms of sharpness of the 2.8 it goes in this order.

70-200mm L F2.8 IS II
70-200mm L F2.8
70-200mm L F2.8 IS I

The non IS is a tad sharper than the VI IS. But I dont think you would notice. The 70-200mm L is about to be discontinued form the range and is a great price point as the IS II is nearly twice the price.

 

[tomscott]

Also another couple of examples 70mm at F5.6 ISO100 shooting a BMW Z4M


BMW Z4M Coupe with CSL wheels by tom_scott88, on Flickr

with some extension tubes 1/50s F2.8 ISO500 on a tripod.


IMG_9407 by tom_scott88, on Flickr

BTCC Panning F5.6 1/200s ISO100


320si BTCC by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Antony Gormley another place, 145mm F4 1/400 ISO 400

Another Place, Antony Gormley, Crosby Beach, Liverpool by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Antony Gormley another place, 200mm F2.8 1/500 ISO 400


Another Place, Antony Gormley, Crosby Beach, Liverpool by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Lowther Castle, F4.5 1/250 ISO 320 130mm


Lowther Castle by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Penrith, F8 1/1000s 140mm with a 2x extender(280mm) ISO400

Penrith, Cumbria, South toward Ullswater by tom_scott88, on Flickr

Scarecrow, F11 200mm with 2x extender (400mm) ISO 200 1/320s

Scarecrow by tom_scott88, on Flickr

I do love this lens.

 

[rwmson]

I like the scarecrow shot a lot!

 

[tomscott]

Thanks

 

[surfer57]

Great shots. I'm pretty happy with my decision to pick up the 24-70 and 16-35 for now. I have used the 70-200 VII so I know how amazing it is and that is part of why I was so torn. I'll use the other lens to make some money shooting weddings and what not. The toughest part will be deciding whether to pick up the lens or an SPL waterhousing for the 1DX next.