Which 70-200 should I buy - or should I wait?

[Maximilian]

Now is a great time to buy a Canon 70-200, either f/4 IS or f/2.8 IS II. Don't bother with the others. You could be waiting for years for a update, and they still might not beat those two Canon lenses.

I have not heard of Canon working on a new version, the f/2.8 is still a new model as lenses go, and the f/4 IS is also superb.

+1000 to all this.

I have heard absolutely NOTHING about Canon to update any of its 70-200 soon.
The recent IS lenses are best choice and it's up to you to decide whether to save money by choosing third party with all the pros and cons of third party products.

 

[Handrews]

70-200 F4 IS was my first L lens, and I was blown away by IQ: rich colors, microcontrast and excellent sharpness. The IS sound is louder than with other lenses - it's normal for this lens, but you'll hear it on video.
For me, it's a lens I'd buy again.

 

[meywd]

Although i sold mine recently, cash flow issue, it was my best lens and my most used, I used it with the 2X II Extender and it was amazingly sharp even with it, so yeah I recommend getting it and not waiting for the upgrade while there isn't one confirmed.

 

[andrei1989]

as you said you are an amateur, i would suggest to seriously consider the tamron and the sigma, if budget is also a factor. weight is similar throughout the 3 brands. the tamron and sigma will give 90-95% of the image quality of the canon. price is half! second hand you could get the 2.8 sigma/tamron for the price of a f4 canon.

i believe these 2 are the most likely to be updated soon to the new design rules of both companies

 

[Alex_M]

Boog,

Just wanted to chime in and perhaps share my experience with some of the 70-200 lenses available on the market at this very moment:

1. If money is not an issue and budget is accomodative, I would suggest to look long and hard at Canon 70-200 F2.8 II L lens as it is no doubt the best 70-200 EF mount L quality lens money can by at the moment.
2. for folks on limited budget or not using the lens enough to justify the option #1, or not needing F4 aperture ever (say, studio shooters - Tony Corbell) - Canon 70-200 F4 L might be the right lens. ( Personally, I do not like the bokeh of the lens but that is just me).
3. For folks that would like to have _ALL_ the functionality of the Canon 70-200 F2.8 II L lens but cannot afford or justify paying premium dollars for it, I would recommend to see if the Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC USD fits their requirements.
I am personaly in the category #3 ( I cannot afford the best of the best so have to be smart about spending my money ). I used the Tamron lens extensively over last 1.5 years and so far very happy with IQ, AF quality, bokeh characteristics of the lens. The lens never let me down in low light conditions, locked swiftly (almost as fast as the Canon competitors) on fast moving subject and in difficult conditions ( say, focusing through the wire mesh on the fast moving subject about 20 meters away behind the mesh). I bought the lens brand new ( open box deal) from an Authorised Tamron reseller in Melbourne with full 24 month warranty included for A$950.00 - that's approx. US$750.00 . Speaking from my experience with the lens: The lens is sharp, very sharp up to 160mm FL and then just sharp there after at 200mm not as sharp as Canon F2.8 but difference is really minor. I would hazard the statement that at @135mm Tamron is even better than Canon F2.8 at the same focal length. and did I mentioned reliable AF performance? Happy to share some of the photos I have taken with the Tamron lens. Send me a message if interested.
Dustin Abbot owns the Tamron lens and used it professionally. I am sure he will be happy to address your query regarding the qualities of the lens.

And finally, few words about the Sigma 70-200 EX DG OS USM:

well, the lens is not up to speed with the other 3 options... across the board.. That said Lindsay Adler previously used the lens extensively and produced stunning award winning images with the lens. I would personally avoid purchasing the Sigma 70-200 EX DG OS USM lens as I had _major_ AF and reliability issue with my copy. I had to return ther lens in 2 weeks time as my experience with it was unbearable. It did not cut the mustard for me. at all..

Hi folks

Looking for the benefit of your wisdom. I'm fairly sure I read a while ago that Sigma were planning to update their current 70-200 f2.8 lens, and I believe Canon are also working one a new one. I do a fair bit of sports photography (very amateurish) and currently use either my 130mm portrait lens or my 70-300L when doing action shots.

I'd absolutely love the 70-200L IS f2.8 canon but it's an enormous amount of money for me to spend. I also think I read somewhere that this lens is due to be updated fairly soon and would be gutted if I dropped the cash then it was refreshed.

I hear decent things about the Sigma 70-200 EX DG OS USM but again I am fairly sure I read that they're releasing a new version of this.

I know Tamron also do a similar lens but know less about that.

Bad time to buy a 70-200mm if I can wait 6 months? What would you do I my position? All views very welcome.

Boog

 

[Mikehit]

Dustin Abbot owns the Tamron lens and use it professionally. Send him a message. I am sure he will be happy to address your query regarding the qualities of the lens.

His website has a review of the lens, up to Dustin's usual high standards:

https://dustinabbott.net/2013/07/tamron-sp-70-200mm-f2-8-di-vc-usd-review/

 

[boogaloo]

Now is a great time to buy a Canon 70-200, either f/4 IS or f/2.8 IS II. Don't bother with the others. You could be waiting for years for a update, and they still might not beat those two Canon lenses.

I have not heard of Canon working on a new version, the f/2.8 is still a new model as lenses go, and the f/4 IS is also superb.

+1000 to all this.

I have heard absolutely NOTHING about Canon to update any of its 70-200 soon.
The recent IS lenses are best choice and it's up to you to decide whether to save money by choosing third party with all the pros and cons of third party products.

Interestingly the top article on this site at the moment is "Another Mention of a New EF 70-200mm Lens". I was sure I had seen a number of rumours on this subject.

http://www.canonrumors.com/another-mention-of-a-new-ef-70-200mm-lens-cr2/

I'd like to say a MASSIVE thank you to everyone who has posted and given their advice. So much to read, re-read and think about. Much appreciated.

 

[Maximilian]

Now is a great time to buy a Canon 70-200, either f/4 IS or f/2.8 IS II. Don't bother with the others. You could be waiting for years for a update, and they still might not beat those two Canon lenses.

I have not heard of Canon working on a new version, the f/2.8 is still a new model as lenses go, and the f/4 IS is also superb.

+1000 to all this.

I have heard absolutely NOTHING about Canon to update any of its 70-200 soon.
The recent IS lenses are best choice and it's up to you to decide whether to save money by choosing third party with all the pros and cons of third party products.

Interestingly the top article on this site at the moment is "Another Mention of a New EF 70-200mm Lens". I was sure I had seen a number of rumours on this subject.

http://www.canonrumors.com/another-mention-of-a-new-ef-70-200mm-lens-cr2/

I'd like to say a MASSIVE thank you to everyone who has posted and given their advice. So much to read, re-read and think about. Much appreciated.

Yeah! Sometimes the news are faster than you'd think, can read and write.
As a regular reader I was a little bit surprised of the "Another" because I couldn't recall any mention before.
But I suppose this could also have to do with my by stress limited short-term memory :-[

So I would modify my advice now to a:
Now that we have a rumor of a new lens in the pipe but no scheduled release date or even if it is f/2.8 or f/4.0, you must ask yourself how long you are willing to wait for your 70-200 lens and if you are not willing to pay the premium price for first adopters for this 70-200 IS III (expect > 2.500, maybe even 3.000) you'll have to wait even longer for the first good discounts.
So with a minimum of 12 to 24 months waiting I'd be looking at the choices available NOW.
And if you are planning to "upgrade" later keep in mind that the resale value of a L lens might be higher than of a Tamron.
If money is an important aspect, think of the Tamron, but keep in mind that also there is a mention of a G2 from Dustin Abbott within whatever time:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=31307.msg635979#msg635979

So think about what you'd prefer:
Spend your time waiting for the last 5% gear performance or
spend your time shooting with 95% gear performance, surpassing your technique by sure - at least mine

 

[SteveM]

Why is it you feel you need another lens for sport? The obvious assumption is the aperture. To match the reach of the 70-300 you would then need a 1.4 extender.......A further £360. So for the princely sum of £2360 you get a similar reach and a 1 stop faster lens.
I would suggest that to invest in the 70-200 f2.8 mkll the faster aperture/ reduced depth of field must be seriously important to you first.
I have both the 70-200 f4 and f2.8 mkll, I bought the f2.8 mkll because I needed a faster lens due to the poor light I often work in....difference between shooting at 6400 ISO and 3200 ISO is big.
A camera lens is a tool you choose for a particular situation.

 

[Luds34]

I tend to agree with others, if money is no object the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is the lens to get. I also agree that the Tamron is a good 9/10 of a lens for a lot less then 9/10 of the price. Another option I'll throw out there, is if you want the fast f/2.8 but want to save some money, the Canon f/2.8 non-IS is a good option to consider. Can be had used in "very good" condition for $900 from Amazon right now.

 

[Andries]

I must say, I LOVE the SIGMA ART lenses I have at the moment and I can't help wondering what a revised sigma would be like. Though, of course, they haven't gone for weather sealing.

A few months back I bought myself a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VR right before I went on a 3-day trip to Denmark. On camera results looked satisfying, but every now and then the AF acted strange. It was tracking moving objects (airplanes) and suddenly went to the minimum focusing distance and stayed there until I released the shutter button and pressed it again to refocus. This did not happen just once, but over 10 times each of those days.

Once home I checked the images on the computer and found that the left side of my images was sharp and the right side was blurry when shot around 200mm. When images were shot around 70mm, it was the other way around (left blurry and right sharp). After some testing it became clear the lens had a decentered lens element.

At that point I lost my faith in Tamron. You would expect a €1.450 lens to to get some quality testing done after assembly, but this clearly wasn't the case with my lens. I returned it to the store and (with an additional payment) traded it for the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II USM. As an enthusiast it was hard for me to convince myself into spending €2.200 on that lens, but only a day after shooting with it I was convinced I made the right choice ! Now, a good 5 months later, I am still conviced I made the right choice. The lens is one of the sharpest zoom lenses I've ever seen. I did spend €800 more than planned, but that is quickly forgotten (and justified) once you see the results. Even though a new Sigma lens might be a good alternative, if the lens is going to be your primary lens (say using it over 50% of the time), it might be better to invest some more and get the Canon.

I must say I do agree with you that the new Sigma lenses have really stepped up their game. Depending on the lens they are very close their Canon counterpart. In some cases they even match or surpass it. Given the fact they are less expensive than the L-series I can see a lot of enthusiasts buying more and more lenses of Sigma's Global Vision line. I sure did so. My primary lens is Canon's 70-200, but my two secondary lenses are the Sigma 24-105 Art and the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. Had I bought similar lenses from Canon, I would have spent an additional €1.400.

the only worrying points I have are durability (hope they last at least 10 years) and resale value (because L-lenses tend to keep their value very long, don't know about the new Sigmas)

 

[GMCPhotographics]

If the OP buys a really good S/H copy, then when the mkIII comes out, he can sell it to fund the new one and not loose much money. Canon 70-200 LIS II lenses hold their value very well and don't depreciate much over a few years, even when a new model is released.