Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Comment

This is my first L-series lens and I have to say that initially I was considering retuning it. Its very big, and heavy, and that for $1500 ... On top of it; definitely not you "all-purpose" lens. I experimented with this lens for a few days and have to say ... WOW ... this lens is FAST and produces awesome pictures. I have pictures of my dog running through the snow and the snow flakes look like frozen in the air. Now I will never buy a lens that is not at least f/2.8 ... I did consider the f/4 version but having experienced this speed, Im glad I didnt. I also considered the IS version (much more expensive) but I think that would have been a waste of money for my purposes. I have yet to take a blurry picture. Even in the evening indoors, its preforming great! As you can gather; Im not returning this lens, it has become my new favorite ... I only wish Canon would create an L-series lens to replay my 18-135 Canon lens ... then Id be completely set with the lenses I need. Oh right, I did get the Canon X2 extender as well - and its a great accessory to get with that. One note: I did purchase a case for the lens, to only find out that one is already included with the lens (as is a tripod mount - which helps holding the lens). For those in doubt; consider renting one for a couple of days, or visit a local camera store. Youll be amazed by the picture quality.

Show more

Comment

Yes, the quality of your glass is what helps you get great pictures. I am by no means a professional photographer, but when it comes to getting the best, I do whatever I can to get it. This lens is smooth and delivers. I highly recommend this lens. I used to purchase SIGMA and Rokinon to save money but after experiencing the quality of the Canon manufactured lenses, I probably wont go back to the others. I know this is expensive glass and if you can afford it, or you are in the business of making money with your camera, then you should get quality glass.

Show more

Comment

This was listed “good used” this is a lye- all the setting markings are rubbed off...the thing is dented scratched, it looks like it was dropped off a mountain and then kicked repeatedly. I was so concerned I put it on the camera and seems to be ok so I will keep it- oh and it came in a box with no bubble wrap as it was just rolling and banging around free— very disappointed in Amazon

Show more

Comment

How can I sum this up? This lens is a masterpiece, and probably the best lens Canon makes (it is also one of the sharpest.) Images at the 200mm range at 2.8 are sharp - stop it down to 4.0 and it is SUPER SHARP. This lens is also a SUPERB value! At just over a grand, you get the best range ever for a telephoto (except maybe the 28-300mm that Canon makes, but hey, its double the price) and its also SUPER FAST. I cant even believe it when this lens focuses - it catches the object before I do! Along with my 50mm 1.4 and 16-35mm 2.8L, I have a dream team that will travel the world with me. Great job, Canon, keep up the amazing work! P.S.: Are you debating between the non-IS 2.8 and the IS 2.8? The difference comes when we look at prices. The IS version is almost twice as expensive! However, it takes as great quality as the non-IS plus gives you extra stabilization protection. However, if you increase the shutter speed to 200 or over, then your really dont need IS because 200 shutter is all you really need (for the non-IS.) Happy shooting!

Show more

Comment

This lens blew me away when I first started shooting with it! I have to admit, for a year now, I have been watching the IS version II of this particular lens, however, I just couldnt come up with the funds to purchase it yet, so I got this lens. Ive heard all of the talk about L lenses before, and MAN! This lens is so sharp, its scary. I love the blur quality of this lens, especially zoomed in at 200mm. The build is very good. I cant wait to start shooting events and weddings with this thing! I also have the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens and with both of these beasts working together, I should have no problem shooting in dim light. The only issue, which is small by the way, is that it does not have Image Stabilization. Its not so much of a big deal to me now because I know how to hold most of my shots steady enough, however, I still want the IS to cover me when Im not as steady, especially while shooting an event. Overall, I will definitely recommend this lens. If you have the money to pay for the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS, then go for it. If you dont, but still want to shoot in low light from 70-200mm, get this lens. You will not be disappointed. PS: If you decide to get this lens, make sure you learn how to hold your camera steady. Also, if the weight is an issue and you want some kind of stability while taking pictures, check out some $50 monopods.

Show more

Comment

This lens is worth every penny. While it costs five times the prosumer Sigmaf4-5.6 70-300mm lens its a relative bargain. The Sigma lens was not suitable for low light conditions such as the high school soccer and volleyball games that I photograph of my daughter playing outside hitter or goalkeeper. I just bought it last week and last night I had my first chance to use it to take pictures of the daughters soccer team. I shot 274 shots and kept 190. The photos I kept are incredible. Those I discarded were simply bad photography on my part. WHATs in the box Lens Hood Case Case strap Instructions Warranty card Focus is lightning fast with my Rebel XT. PICTURE QUALITY Crisp, clear and sharp describe the images. Color is vivid and very saturated. F 2.8 makes night time high school soccer shots easy to do and still have adequate shutter speed at full 200 mm of zoom. I really like this lens. While image stabilization would be nice, the extra $500 was beyond my hobbyist budget. I shoot with a monopod so on the field shots are crystal clear. If you want to hand hold it save up the extra money. WEIGHT It is not an issue for me. I use it mainly for taking shots of my daughter playing soccer and volleyball. Both are low light conditions. The monopod really helps. Hiking with this thing could be an issue. SUMMARY If you can afford it buy it. You wont be disappointed *************** UPDATE I have had this lens for a couple of weeks and shot about 3000 pictures with it of both indoor volleyball and night soccer games. My opinion is getting even better. Bar none, this is tremendous lens and it a league of its own. If you can swing it money wise go for it. I shot all evening last night on high school soccer field that was (by high school standards) well lit. Using shutter priority I was able to keep the shutter speed faster than 1/200 of a second and was still operating in f.28-3.5 range on the lens. Weight is not an issue. This is a non-IS lens but the monopod makes that a non-issue. Now I need to sell my Sigma 70-300 mm lens so I can buy a 1.4 teleconverter for this lens for pre-dusk warmups where there is ample light.

Show more

Comment

There are many other reviews to this wonderful lens and I cant add too much on the technical issues. This is an upgrade to the Canon 70-200 f4. I shoot in dimly lit interiors (basketball, volleyball, church settings, etc.) and the extra f-stops is worth it. Outdoors with the 1.4x extender (baseball, football, soccer) is fantastic! I decided NOT to get the IS for several reasons: 1) I use a Manfrotto monopod almost exclusively when using this lens (used it with the f4 also) and with practice the pictures comes out sharp. The monopod also helps to hold everything during a long shooting session. Having 3 pounds of equipment hanging on your neck or holding it up in shooting position is a pain. 2) I couldnt justify the IS expense since using the monopod partially defeats the IS feature. Again, practice holding steady regardless. Remember shooting the old Nikon F with the teles before IS, VR, OS were ever invented? Bottom line: Great lens, great bokah, great in low light situations. Highly recommend a good monopod to hold everything steady!

Show more

Comment

Amazing lens! The only thing Id recommend is buying the one with the Image Stabilizer. The lens is SO heavy that you can have a lot of camera shake if youre not using a tripod. But overall very professional quality photos. Best lens Ive ever owned. Wonderful if youre a wedding photographer.

Show more

Comment

I agonized over this lens for months. The cost! The weight! Stabilize or not to stabilize? I finally purchased the lens (after my husband decided he had learned more about Canon lenses than he every wanted to know). I took it out on a hike and I have no regrets. I used a monopod for some shots, a tripod for others and just held it too. Stabilization did not seem to be an issue…I am not shooting sports or moving quickly. I am truly amazed by the performance of this lens and I would highly recommend it to those looking for a mid range (depth of field) telephoto lens.

Show more

Comment

Im an ameteur photographer and was super happy with the pictures I was able to capture with this so far. I cant say a lot of technical stuff about it like some of the other reviewers on here but I really dont think you can go wrong with purchasing this lens. If you are at all concerned about quality or function, you dont need to be. Maybe you can find a lens of this quality for cheaper but if you are tired of looking, then I think you will be more than happy with this purchase.

Show more