| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
That new Canon 70-200 thingie
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
 |
Dallas | TX | US | Posted: 2:28 PM on 12.04.10 |
->> Hola peoples:
Now that it's been out for a while, I'm wondering if anybody out in SportsShooter land has some experience with or thoughts on the latest Canon 70-200L (the 2.8 version, IS). They had them in Vancouver during oly, but I never got around to checking one out.
Anyway, just wondering if it's worth upgrading from the previous version. I'm tempted, but thought I'd check. Not seeing any reviews on here, though.
So aside from the ridiculous price, any other reasons NOT to upgrade?
Thanks in advance,
- gerry - |
|
Colin Hackley, Photographer
|
Tallahassee | FL | USA | Posted: 2:48 PM on 12.04.10 |
| ->> Gerry, the lens is crazy sharp. I went from the non-is model (which I thought was a very good lens) to this in the spring and have to say that it may be as sharp as my long Canon primes. Works great on older bodies like the Mark IIn but really sings on the current model bodies. Price hurts but this is a bread and butter lens that you should be able to use for many, many years. |
|
Will Powers, Photographer
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 12:08 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> Colin says it well |
|
Chris Large, Photographer
|
Okotoks | AB | Canada | Posted: 12:16 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> I've had mine since August and am noticing a dramatic improvement. Sold my 5 yr old 2.8L IS for $1600 and upgraded - worth the price. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 12:27 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> oh CRAP! now I want one! |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 12:32 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> I thought the original version held more coffee but the version II has a better lid. Wait, you are talking about the Canon 70-200 thermos thingie, right? |
|
Andrew Nelles, Photographer
 |
Chicago | IL | usa | Posted: 1:05 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> I picked up the new one a few months ago, it's absolutely worth it. I was never happy with the previous IS version, so I had been shooting with a non-IS. Dramatic improvement over both previous 70-200s in my opinion. The new hood is pretty great too. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
| | | Posted: 8:04 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> You're giving my 70-200f2.8 non-IS with a wobbly cowling problem (exterior cosmetic issue only) an inferiority complex! |
|
Neil Turner, Photographer
|
Bournemouth | UK | United Kingdom | Posted: 9:01 AM on 12.05.10 |
->> I always thought that my copy of the 70-200 f2.8 IS was a great one - and it is. BUT, having tried the mark 2 version I am saving my pennies. The IS is a whole generation or more better, the sharpness and contrast are as near perfect as I have ever seen in a zoom lens and the focus speed (even on a 5D mk2) is top class.
As Colin said, this is a bread and butter lens and I will upgrade as soon as I have a spare £2000. |
|
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
|
Dallas | TX | US | Posted: 9:55 AM on 12.05.10 |
->> Thanks for all the feedback, folks, both on here and via email.
Looks like I'll bite the bullet. The DMN actually has a 50/50 program for employee equipment (minus pool glass), so I can actually get the lens for half.
Anyone interested in getting a used but never abused series one version of the lens ought to keep an eye on the Classifieds.
Again, appreciate the responses.
- gerry - |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 10:02 AM on 12.05.10 |
| ->> Fish, the wobbly cowling, is that a result of a TSA pat down of your lens? |
|
Mike Carlson, Photographer
|
Bayonet Point | FL | USA | Posted: 11:59 AM on 12.12.10 |
| ->> So, Gerry, after your upgrade how would you answer your own question... |
|
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
|
Dallas | TX | US | Posted: 3:58 PM on 12.12.10 |
->> Hey Mike:
I haven't had a chance to put that lens through its paces; in fact it's still in my locker at work.
Confession time -- when it comes to my non-sports, daily grind work, I hardly ever touch long glass. It's bad, I know.
So, I'm gonna wait till my next Cows game or whatever before I come back with a review.
Thanks for checking in though. And thanks again for all the help, amigos.
- gerry - |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
| | | Posted: 6:43 PM on 12.12.10 |
->> Geo,
The wobbly cowling is as a result of a Rutgers basketball player coming off the rim at the Mullins Center and finding themselves landing on an EOS 1D/70-200f2.8 combo about 6 years ago.
The folks at Midstate Camera Repair fixed it right up with some electrical tape ... saving me a few hundred bucks. I keep thinking "I'll get that fix" but the damn lens keeps working just fine (despite being hideously ugly and wobbly).
The TSA did however buy me some new Lumedyne lights in late 2005 ... but that is a whole different story. |
|
Ed Chan, Photographer
|
San Diego | CA | US | Posted: 10:05 AM on 12.17.10 |
->> I had issues with the new IS version II and my Mark III. Yes, the new version was sharper and had better contrast. Loved the image quality. It was MONEY with the Mark IV. However, with the Mark III in sidelit/backlit situations autofocus was clearly worse than version I.
I shot with it for 6 days and ended up returning it, couldn't justify keeping two 70-200's. Just my experience with one particular lens/camera combo. |
|
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
|
Dallas | TX | US | Posted: 10:53 AM on 12.20.10 |
->> OK peoples: Have put it through it's paces on a couple of daily assignments and at yesterday's pathetic Cowboys win.
Great lens -- just great. Works well on a 5d MkII, Mark III and IV. Probably best on the latter.
Not regretting a thing. Thank you kindly for the assistance,
- gerry - |
|
Jeff Brehm, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Salisbury | NC | USA | Posted: 11:32 AM on 01.11.11 |
->> Mine is on the way from Adorama (thanks to Jeff and his team).
For those considering one, or any other Canon lens, beware that Canon has announced a price increase effective Feb. 1. |
|
Jeff Brehm, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Salisbury | NC | USA | Posted: 11:04 AM on 01.24.11 |
| ->> Got my first chance to use it over the weekend. It worked great on both the Mark IV and 7D. I think it is actually brighter than V.1. Images are noticeably sharper and bokeh is better. The AF definitely is quicker than the V.1, at least with these two bodies. |
|
Aaron Babcock, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Lincoln | NE | | Posted: 12:03 PM on 02.01.11 |
| ->> Absolutely gorgeous lens. Best purchase I've made. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|