Get the best deals on Canon 70-200mm Focal f/2.8 Camera Lenses when you shop the largest online selection at eBay.com. Free shipping on many items Browse your favorite brands affordable prices. Used CANON EF 70-200 f2.8 L USM Lens in Good Working Condition FREE SHIPPING!!! Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS II USM. $1,000.00 +$17.26.
- Navigate ReviewJump to review page...
- The Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 EX DG HSM OS is a staple in the Sigma DSLR lens lineup. This telephoto camera lens is true workhorse with a versatile range of 70-200mm, a constant 2.8 aperture, a Hyper Sonic Motor (HSM) and an Optical Stabilizer (OS).
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Pdf User Manuals. View online or download Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Instructions Manual, Instruction, Parts Catalog, Instructions.
Lab Test Results
Blur
Chromatic Aberration
Vignetting
Geometric Distortion
Blur
Chromatic Aberration
Vignetting
Geometric Distortion
Your purchases support this site
Buy the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
SLRgear Review
June 21, 2010
by Andrew Alexander
Canon announced its update to the 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L IS leading up to CES2010. A go-to lens for most Canon professionals, the new version of the telephoto zoom lens features a revision to the optical design (using 5 UD glass and 1 fluorite glass element) and a slightly closer minimum focusing distance (1.2 meters instead of 1.3).
The EF lens is compatible with both sub-frame and full-frame sensor camera bodies, and uses a constant ƒ/2.8 aperture across all focal lengths. On a sub-frame body, the effective field of view for the lens is 112-320mm; on a body such as the Canon 1D mark IV, with its APS-H-sized sensor, the lens provides an effective field of view of 91-260mm.
The lens ships with the ET-87 petal-shaped lens hood, a lens case, and tripod mount. The lens is available now for around $2,450.
August 30, 2010: We've added our new image stabilization test for this lens.
Sharpness
Beginning with the lens mounted on the sub-frame 20D, we noted excellent results for sharpness at all focal lengths, even wide open at ƒ/2.8. Performance at ƒ/2.8 is not tack-sharp, but it's quite close at around 1.5 blur units. Stopping down to ƒ/4 provides a marginal increase in performance, and at 100mm and ƒ/4 it is indeed about as sharp as our testing can measure. There are tiny gains from ƒ/5.6 onward, but the focal range between 135mm and 200mm never hits 1 blur unit; by ƒ/11, diffraction limiting begins to set in, and impacts on overall sharpness. At this point it's more notable at 200mm, where we see 1.5 blur units; at the other focal lengths, we still note excellent sharpness results, between 1 and 1.5 blur units.
Stopping down further impacts significantly on sharpness, until we see between 2-2.5 blur units at ƒ/22, and around 4 blur units, fully stopped down at ƒ/32.
The full-frame 5D is even more demanding on the lens. Wide open at ƒ/2.8, the lens shows its best performance at 70mm, with a generous sweet spot of 1-1.5 blur units in the center of the frame, degrading slightly to some corner softness; around 2 blur units. From 100mm and up we note increasing corner softness and a lessening of that sharp sweet spot until it's just over 1.5 blur units in the center and 2 in the corners at 200mm.
Stopping down provides additional sharpness, but never does the lens reach absolute, 1-blur unit 'tack' sharpness across the frame (it comes very close, for instance 70mm at ƒ/8). Still, it's very sharp indeed. At ƒ/16 diffraction limiting has set in, with the lens providing a consistent 1.5 blur units across the frame. At ƒ/22 the lens shows 2 blur units across the frame, and interestingly, at ƒ/32 it shows 3 blur units across the frame (as opposed to the 4 blur units we noted with the 20D at that aperture).
Chromatic Aberration
You have to peep very closely to the 100% crops of our sample images to detect any chromatic aberration at all with the Canon 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 II; that fluorite element is clearly earning its keep. In short, there is hardly any to speak of, and where it does show is in the corners at either 70mm or 200mm.
Canon 70 200 F2 8 Ii Manual
Shading ('Vignetting')
On the sub-frame 20D, corner shading isn't really an issue with this lens. The only light falloff to speak of is found at 200mm and ƒ/2.8, where the corners are just over a quarter-stop darker than the center. Not much to write home about.
On the full-frame 5D, it's another story however, with significant corner shading when the lens is used wide open. It's slightly more forgiving at 70mm; at 100mm and greater, using the lens at ƒ/2.8 produces corners which are almost a full stop darker than the center. This reduces to a half-stop, a third of a stop and a quarter-stop at ƒ/4, ƒ/5.6 and ƒ/8 respectively. When used at 70mm, this light falloff reduces earlier, with the corners being only a third of a stop darker than the center at ƒ/4, and less than a quarter-stop darker at ƒ/5.6.
Distortion
Results for distortion are typical of telephoto zoom lenses, with some barrel distortion at the wider end, and pincushion distortion at the telephoto end. The point of convergence (where there is neither type of distortion) is balanced nicely at around 105mm. As you would expect the distortion isn't as significant with the lens mounted on the sub-frame 20D; it shows just +0.25% barrel distortion in the corners at 70mm and -0.2% pincushion distortion in the corners at 200mm. With the lens mounted on the full-frame 5D, it's a bit more prominent, with +0.5% barrel distortion in the corners at 70mm, and -0.5% pincushion distortion in the corners at 200mm.
Autofocus Operation
As an L-class lens with Canon's USM focusing technology, there aren't many lenses which will keep up with the focusing speed of the EF 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L IS II USM. It takes well less than a second to go through the focusing range. The lens makes almost no noise as it does this. As well, autofocus results can be overridden at any time by simply turning the focusing ring. The autofocusing speed can also be improved by restricting the focusing distance: a switch allows the user to select between two focusing ranges, either 1.2m to infinity or 2.5m to infinity. The front element of the lens does not rotate during focusing, making life that little bit easier for polarizer users.
Macro
While the lens isn't intended as a macro lens, its minimum close-focusing distance has been improved, at just 1.2 meters (just under four feet). The magnification is 0.21x.
Build Quality and Handling
Like all the white-body L-series Canon lenses, build quality on the EF 70-200 mm ƒ/2.8L IS II USM is exceptional, incorporating seals for weather and dust-resistance. It's built like a tank, and frankly weighs like one as well. This is a very heavy lens (over three pounds), not one that you're going to want to hand-hold all day. Combined with its image stabilization, a monopod with a ball head would be a great way to work with this lens. If you do have to handhold it though, the IS works very well. Canon claims four f-stops of shake reduction, and we will be hopefully be producing some evidence to discuss the accuracy of this claim in the near future.
There are several control and information points on the lens that are worth noting. In addition to the focus and zoom rings, there are four command switches. From top to bottom, you have the focus limiter switch (described previously) and a switch to enable or disable autofocus on the lens ('AF / MF'); there are then two switches to control image stabilization. The first activates or deactivates the system ('ON / OFF') and the second selects the image stabilization mode, mode 1 (for stabilization both horizontal and vertical motion) and mode 2 (for stabilizing just vertical motion, suitable for panning shots). A window provides distance information in feet and meters, and while there is no depth-of-field scale, there is an infrared index.
The focusing ring is quite large (slightly larger than the previous version, in fact), composed of rubber with small ribs about 1 3/4 inches wide. The ring provides excellent manual focusing fidelity, with a slightly smooth resistance and plenty of travel. The ring ends in soft stops on both ends of the focusing spectrum, and will focus past infinity.
The zoom ring is composed of rubber with large ribs, about 1 1/4 inches wide. The ring takes about seventy degrees of turning action to go from 70mm to 200mm, and again, the ring is very smooth, firm but not too tight; it requires two fingers to move. Zoom creep isn't a problem with this lens, and there is no lens extension during zoom operations.
The ET-87 lens hood is petal-shaped, attaches via a bayonet mount, and adds about three and a half inches to the overall length of the lens. The interior of the hood is flocked to reduce any stray light, and there's a locking mechanism to keep the hood attached to the lens. It's a pricey item: around $75 to replace.
The lens features Image Stabilization, and you can see our IS Test for more details there.
Alternatives
Canon EF 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L IS USM ~$1,900
The twenty-four hundred dollar question is whether or not the new lens is worth the upgrade from the old. Without question, the new lens is sharper than the old, but the gain is mostly at 70mm. The old version of the lens was very sharp indeed. Thanks to the fluorite lens elements, chromatic aberration is reduced to minimal levels, but the old lens didn't really suffer from CA. The other characteristics - distortion and corner shading - are essentially the same. Canon claims an extra stop of image stabilization with the new lens.
Canon EF 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L USM ~$1,200
If you can live without image stabilization, Canon also offers the previous model in a non-IS version. The lens proved to be slightly sharper than the previous IS-version, but the new IS 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is sharper than them both (at double the price, you'd hope it would be). CA, distortion and corner shading are at about the same level.
Sigma 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO ~$2,500
We haven't yet tested this new lens from Sigma, and it doesn't yet seem to be shipping. At the price point suggested by Sigma, it will have to be a very good lens indeed to justify an off-brand purchase by Canon users. Non-OS lenses from Sigma in this focal length range have been very sharp, with HSM motors providing very fast autofocus results.
Tamron 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 Di LD IF Macro SP AF ~$730
Tamron also offers a 70-200mm alternative, though Vibration Control (VC) technology hasn't yet been added to this lens. Even so, it's one of the sharper 70-200mm offerings, though chromatic aberration is more evident. Distortion and corner shading are about the same.
Conclusion
This one's fairly straightforward: if you were looking, you probably were already thinking about getting this lens, and there's nothing to fault it. If absolutely need image stabilization and the sharpest, best image quality in a 70-200mm zoom, it's money well-spent. However, if you are less picky, you probably won't be disappointed with the tried-and-true original version of the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS, either. Canon's made some impressive fine-tuning adjustments to the lens, but unlike other manufacturers, no one was really complaining about the original version of the lens so much that it needed a refresh.
Sample Photos
The VFA target should give you a good idea of sharpness in the center and corners, as well as some idea of the extent of barrel or pincushion distortion and chromatic aberration, while the Still Life subject may help in judging contrast and color. We shoot both images using the default JPEG settings and manual white balance of our test bodies, so the images should be quite consistent from lens to lens.
As appropriate, we shoot these with both full-frame and sub-frame bodies, at a range of focal lengths, and at both maximum aperture and ƒ/8. For the 'VFA' target (the viewfinder accuracy target from Imaging Resource), we also provide sample crops from the center and upper-left corner of each shot, so you can quickly get a sense of relative sharpness, without having to download and inspect the full-res images. To avoid space limitations with the layout of our review pages, indexes to the test shots launch in separate windows.
Your purchases support this site
Canon EF - White
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM User Reviews
- 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbycaMARYnon(8 reviews)weight
Nothing new to add.
reviewed November 3rd, 2014(purchased for $2,500) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbymariuspavel(5 reviews)price and weight
Without a second thought this is the lens to have. A must have for any professional photographer looking to max out his or her arsenal. A key piece of glass that will not only expand your skills but increases your overall performance as a photographer. Great in low light, ideal for concert photographers, incredible bokeh. Grab this lens ASAP. Check photos with this lens here - www.mariuspavel.ro/trash-dress/
reviewed July 19th, 2014(purchased for $2,499) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyrifqi36(1 reviews)BERAT BOSS
SANGAT BAGUS SANGAT COCOK UNTUK YANG PENCINTA TELEPHOTO...
reviewed October 28th, 2013(purchased for $2,251)
DAN RECOMENDED BANGET KALAU YANG PUNYA BUDGET BANYAK
HARGA RP. 24.799.000
Waktu Gw Beli Kemaren, - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbywaro52(5 reviews)sharpness, contrast, color fidelity, Canon L quality
Another awesome 70-200 zoom from Canon. I think this lens is sharper than my f4 IS version, which is incredible. For indoor sports it focuses quickly with no mircoadjustment needed on either of my bodies. The only bummer is it's weight. Small price to pay for the images it produces.
reviewed November 12th, 2012(purchased for $2,200) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyPino(3 reviews)
not too heavy for walking in the forest ,even with the extender. With extender monopod recommended.
reviewed February 29th, 2012(purchased for $2,350)
Verry fast and sharp AF even with the extender X2.
Used for nature and close ups.
http://www.panoramio.com/user/971669
http://www.hdr-photgraphy.be - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyddoy2k(3 reviews)Bulgy
I got this lens as a second hand from a friend for 1/2 the price [$1,200] as if it were brand new [$2,400]. I am only an amateur but the photos taken from this lens give everyone the impression that I am a professional. Just having the lens attached to my 7D make me look like a professional. Three weeks ago, I assisted the main photographer at a wedding and the newlywed couple told me after seeing my work that they were going to use 70% of my photos for their wedding album so that gotta tell you something positive about the lens. This lens is a MUST have for portrait and wedding photography. Customers and clients are always expecting more for their money, and this lens will not fail you. Expect to receive comments like, 'WOW', 'AMAZING', and 'GREAT' shots from friends and families when using this lens. Let the lens do the work, and you get the credits.
reviewed November 9th, 2010(purchased for $1,200) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyXven(1 reviews)Heavy, expensive
I started with a 70-200 F4 IS three years ago and back then I choose the F4 version over the F/2.8 because the F4 was sharped, lighter and cheaper. Few weeks ago I went out and spend a lot of money on the new F/2.8 version. It is still heavy and it is still expensive (even more today then ever), but it is also sharper - a lot more sharper. I'll claim it is like the F/4 version - but at F/2.8. I managed to sell my used F/4 for $70 then I gave and putting additional $1100 for the F/2.8 I have a dream lens. If you are looking for something light - don't go for this baby - it is very heavy, and the sharpness is almost the same with the F/4. But if you want the extra step, the latest in IS (now up to spec with the F/4) and the latest in sharpness, this is the lens to go for. In terms of money it is too expensive, and the best value for money is IMHO the F/4 version. But if just just the BEST, this is it.
reviewed July 19th, 2010(purchased for $2) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbybangkokuwa(2 reviews)super fast AF, super sharp wide open, amazing CA control .
it is simple , it is the best zoom ever made in any mount available today.
reviewed May 26th, 2010(purchased for $2,100)
I replaced my f4LIS with this one , I use 5D2 as my main cam and 7D as a back up and for action or reach limited applications.
I also have the Nikon D700 and D300s, I also had the AFS70-200f2.8GEDVR2 , it was a really good lens also , but the Canon was simply better , sharper at wide open ,with a bit less CA to deal with.
So, I sent back my Nikon vR2 and kept this amazingly sharp Canon zoom.
To be honest , the only real reason why we choose a f2.8 zoom over the perfectly fine f4LIS version is good wide open performance at f2.8, so I do not care if this or the Nikon sharp at f5.6 but at f2.8 it must be better than my f4LIS at f4 , and it is better than the f4LIS at f2.8.
So, I have no regret choosing this over the Nikon VR2.
But that said , if I could wait it , I would wait the Sigma FLD to be out and compare this lens to the Sigma , and then decide which 70-200f2.8 lens to keep.
Any way , I think I go wide with my D700 and long with my 7D and 5D2.
it is the best zoom ever made and replaced my 3 primes in its range effectively ,so it is worth every penny. - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbychrisjoerg(2 reviews)superb image quality - even wide open, IS, build quality, autofocusprice, a little posh, white, makes you dislike other lenses ;-)
Finally I grasped the nettle, spent a lot of money and got it! And? Wonderful!
reviewed May 20th, 2010(purchased for $2,380)
I upgraded from the 70-200 f4 IS and it's definitly worth the money.
Backgroud blur / bokeh is amazing, images are pin sharp, even @ f/2.8 - and that's what I bought it for.
Didn't have much time to leran using it properly, but here are some first impressions:
First impressions of the new Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM:
http://www.christianjoerg.de/joomla/index.php/equipment/canon-lenses
The only problem is, that you really start to avoid other lenses (maybe except some primes). The image quality is so good, that I don`t want to use my 24-105 f4 L no more. I always think: 'Can I do the shot with 70mm+ focal length?' But I can accept this... ;-)
www.christianjoerg.de
[email protected] - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyMalteR(4 reviews)perfectly sharp, ultra fast AF, built like a tank, strong IS
I just got the chance to try out that lens and, folks, i found nothing to critizise at all. This one is simply outstanding in every aspect.
reviewed April 27th, 2010(purchased for $2,950)
When i first used it on a 5D Mk II, i was wondering why it felt so heavy, there is obviously more mass in front than in the 70-200/4IS. But if you manage to hold it properly, you wont get any problem.
Weight/price is the only point against that lens at all. It is perfectly sharp at all apertures and all focal lengths, on the level of a superb prime (like my 100/2.0). Contrast, Bokeh, Abberations - simply outstanding. The AF is the fastest i have ever experienced in a tele zoom, and finds its target immediately. The IS seems to be even superior to the ones in the 70-200/ 4.0 IS oder the 70-300/4-5.6IS.
- Navigate ReviewJump to review page...
- Navigate ReviewJump to review page...
Lab Test Results
Blur
Chromatic Aberration
Vignetting
Geometric Distortion
Blur
Chromatic Aberration
Vignetting
Geometric Distortion
Your purchases support this site
Buy the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
SLRgear Review
September 9, 2009
by Andrew Alexander
Released in 1995, this venerable successor to the 80-200mm ƒ/2.8L employs a complex optical formula of 18 lens elements in 15 groups, with 4 elements being ultra-low dispersion glass. Still available new today, Canon introduced an image-stabilized version of the 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 in 2001, which is not the same lens with the addition of IS: this new lens adds five more glass elements, and is heavier and more expensive.
The lens is a constant ƒ/2.8 lens, compatible with full-frame cameras. On a digital body with an APS-C sized sensor, the lens will produce an effective field of view of 112-320mm.
The 70-200mm EF ƒ/2.8L USM ships with a case and petal-shaped lens hood, takes 77mm filters and is available for approximately $1,250.
Sharpness
The Canon 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L USM is impressively sharp, one of the sharpest zoom lenses we've tested in the 70-200mm range. This is made even more impressive by the fact that the lens design is approaching fifteen years old, designed well before the advent of the digital SLR camera.
The lens is exceptionally sharp at 70mm; even wide open at ƒ/2.8, we note results just above 1 blur unit. Stopped down to ƒ/4, it's tack-sharp pretty much all the way to ƒ/11. At ƒ/16 we begin to note some diffraction limiting. But even at ƒ/22, performance is still very good at 2.5 blur units across the frame.
Over 70mm, wide open performance at ƒ/2.8 isn't as exceptional - here we note results between 1.5 and 2.5 blur units, which is still quite good. This copy of the lens also shows some slight de-centering at ƒ/2.8 which could account for some specific corners which are softer than others. Still, stopped down to just ƒ/4, the lens becomes nicely sharp between 100-135mm, at just over or right on the 1 blur unit line. Again, it's sharp all the way to ƒ/11 and diffraction limiting becomes more obvious at ƒ/16 and above.
If there's a weakness, it's probably at 200mm, where we don't see tack-sharp results as we do at the shorter focal lengths. Wide open performance isn't as good at ƒ/2.8, where de-centering produces a soft upper right corner approaching 4 blur units; overall performance is around 2-3 blur units. Stopping down does improve sharpness, but it isn't until about ƒ/5.6 that the soft corner is reigned in substantially and we see results at the 1-2 blur unit level. At ƒ/8 it's the best it will get, with the majority of the image showing around 1.5 blur units and the right corner showing almost 2 blur units. At ƒ/11 diffraction limiting sets in and performance degrades slightly as the lens is stopped down further.
Fully stopped-down performance, at ƒ/32, isn't recommended - images show about 5 blur units across the frame, with focus becoming particularly uneven at the 200mm setting.
On the full-frame 5D, the sensor is a bit harder on the lens, showing softer corners that aren't visible through the 20D. The above notes apply to full-frame performance, with a few exceptions: at ƒ/2.8 the lens is very good, showing an average performance of around 1.5 blur units below 200mm. At 200mm a small sweet spot of sharpness is available in the center of the frame, but the sides of the image are quite soft at around 3-4 blur units. Stopping down improves the quality of the image, but you'll need to stop down to ƒ/5.6-ƒ/8 to obtain maximum sharpness, which in this case means just over 1 blur unit below 200mm, and just under 2 blur units at 200mm. If you're keeping score, fully stopped-down performance is actually better on the 5D than the 20D, where at ƒ/32 we note results of around 3-3.5 blur units across the frame.
Chromatic Aberration
CA tolerance is also very good with this lens, especially in the midrange (100-135mm) where the numbers are extremely low. At wide angle (70mm) and telephoto (200mm) CA results are a bit higher, but happily at these settings CA is kept at it lowest with the lens used at its wider apertures: stopping down increases CA along a fairly linear curve. However, even fully stopped-down, the lens doesn't exceed the level of 6/100ths of a percent of frame height.
On the full-frame 5D, CA tolerance is the same, if not slightly better.
Shading ('Vignetting')
On the cropped-frame 20D, corner shading isn't really an issue; the only setting which produces any corner shading of note is 200mm, where at ƒ/2.8 we note corners which are 1/3EV darker than the center. At any other setting, light falloff is negligible.
Mounted on the full-frame 5D, light falloff is substantially more noticeable. The lens follows a trend along all focal lengths; at ƒ/2.8, the corners are almost a full stop darker than the center; at ƒ/4, we note around a half-stop of light falloff; at ƒ/5.6, the falloff reduces to about a third of a stop. At ƒ/8 the lens reaches the quarter-stop level.
Distortion
On the 20D, distortion isn't much of a factor: just +0.25% barrel distortion at 70mm in the corners, and -0.2% pincushion distortion at 200mm in the corners. There's a point of 0% distortion at around the 100mm mark.
Distortion is predictably a bit more prominent with the lens mounted on the 5D. At 70mm we note +0.5% barrel distortion in the corners, and at 200mm, it's almost -0.5% pincushion. Fortunately the distortion pattern is fairly linear and should be fairly easy to fix in post-processing (if you need your straight lines to be absolutely straight). Again, there's a break-even point at around 100mm which shows very little distortion.
Autofocus Operation
The EF 70-200 mm ƒ/2.8L uses Canon's ultrasonic motor technology to achieve fast, almost totally silent AF operation. Focusing is quite fast for a lens this large, it taking just over a second to slew from closest focus to infinity or vice versa. That's not amazingly fast, but is pretty nimble for a lens this large, with this much glass to move around while focusing. The focus slew time seemed to be independent of focal length, taking as long whether at 70mm or 200mm. Focus lock was also very fast and sure-footed on our test bodies, and the large ƒ/2.8 maximum aperture will let Canon bodies with special wide-aperture AF provision focus even more accurately.
As a lens with the USM specification, you can override autofocus results at any time by just turning the focus ring.
Macro
With a minimum close-focusing distance of 1.5m (just under 5 feet) and a magnification rating of 0.21x, this isn't really a lens you'll want to use for macro work.
Build Quality and Handling
Like all the white-body L-series Canon lenses, build quality on the EF 70-200 mm ƒ/2.8L is exceptional. It's built like a tank, and frankly weighs like one as well. This is a heavy lens - almost three pounds heavy - not one that you're going to want to hand-hold all day. The included tripod collar is removeable, and balances very well with typical bodies: It was just slightly front-heavy with our EOS-20D mounted on it. A monopod with a ball head would be a great way to work with this lens. The monopod would relieve your arms of the weight, but the ball head would give you good freedom of movement.
The lens isn't weather-sealed like its image-stabilized cousin, though it does feature the same eight-bladed aperture. Canon had moved beyond aperture rings by this point, but there is a recessed distance scale, protected by a clear window. Distances are indicated in feel and meters. There is no depth-of-field scale. Two switches are available on the side of the lens: one to enable and disable autofocus, and a focus limiting switch, with selections for 1.5m - infinity, or 3m - infinity.
This is an internal zoom/internal focus lens design, so the body of the lens doesn't extend during either zooming or focusing, nor does the front element rotate. That means this lens will work well with front-element filters that are rotation-sensitive, like polarizers and graduated neutral density filters.
The zoom ring is the larger of the two, at 1 3/8' wide, composed of a dense black plastic and textured with rececssed ridges. The zoom ring turns quite smoothly, although it has a bit more resistance than those on some lenses. A quarter turn runs the lens through its range of focal lengths.
The focusing ring is just under an inch wide, composed of the same dense black plastic, but with shorter recessed ridges. The lens ends in hard stops at either end of the focusing spectrum, and manual focusing is fairly smooth with this ring. The lens will focus slightly past infinity.
The 70-200 mm ƒ/2.8L comes standard with a large pental-shaped hood that does a good job of shading the front element from flare-producing light sources. That said though, the lens does appear to be fairly prone to flare if you have a strong light source hitting the front element. You'll definitely want to keep the hood in place if you're shooting in direct sunlight or other situations where strong light sources could cause flare. When not in use, the hood can be reversed and stored on the lens for storage.
Alternatives
Canon EF 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L IS USM ~$1,900
Both lenses are similarly sharp, though in our test copies the non-IS lens was much sharper at 70mm and ƒ/2.8; at 200mm and ƒ/2.8, the edge went to the IS version. Stopped down to ƒ/4 or smaller, it's hard to tell them apart. Performance for CA, distortion and corner shading are similar between the two lenses. Apart from a little more weight, length and image stabilization, the two lenses are practically identical - if you don't mind the extra cost.
Canon EF 70-200mm ƒ/4L USM ~$640
Canon makes the 70-200mm ƒ/4 lens in image-stabilized and non-IS versions. Both are significantly lighter and smaller than the 70-200mm ƒ/2.8. The lenses are very similar to their ƒ/2.8 counterparts: stop down the ƒ/2.8 lenses to ƒ/4, and you've got extremely similar performance across sharpness, CA, distortion and corner shading. Essentially, if you don't need ƒ/2.8, there's a big financial savings available for you.
Sigma 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 EX DG HSM APO ~$750
The Sigma performs very well when stopped down to ƒ/4, matching the performance of the Canon. But at ƒ/2.8, there is a definite edge to the Canon. Please note that Sigma has produced a new version of this lens, so these results may not stand to current scrutiny. Results for CA, distortion and corner shading are similar. HSM focusing, similar to Canon's USM performance, provides fast and quiet autofocus.
Tamron 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 Di LD IF Macro SP AF ~$750
The Tamron performs extremely well, slightly sharper than the Canon at ƒ/2.8 above 70mm. Stopped down, it's a match, perhaps a nod to the Canon. CA is slightly higher, but distortion and corner shading are similar. Tamron's autofocus isn't quite as fast nor as quiet as Canon's.
Conclusion
The Canon 70-200mm ƒ/2.8L USM performed very well in our tests, perhaps not as sharp as we'd like at 200mm and ƒ/2.8, but quite impressive at 70mm. CA tolerance is very good, distortion is low, and corner shading is very low. Build quality is very high, and autofocus performance is excellent. For the money, you can't go wrong with this lens.
Sample Photos
The VFA target should give you a good idea of sharpness in the center and corners, as well as some idea of the extent of barrel or pincushion distortion and chromatic aberration, while the Still Life subject may help in judging contrast and color. We shoot both images using the default JPEG settings and manual white balance of our test bodies, so the images should be quite consistent from lens to lens.
As appropriate, we shoot these with both full-frame and sub-frame bodies, at a range of focal lengths, and at both maximum aperture and ƒ/8. For the 'VFA' target (the viewfinder accuracy target from Imaging Resource), we also provide sample crops from the center and upper-left corner of each shot, so you can quickly get a sense of relative sharpness, without having to download and inspect the full-res images. To avoid space limitations with the layout of our review pages, indexes to the test shots launch in separate windows.
Your purchases support this site
Canon EF - White
Canon 70 200 F2 8 Is Usm Ii Manual
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM User Reviews
- 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbynhla350(1 reviews)Fast, Sharp, Colour ,Slick AF, Creamy Bokeh , Build and ISNone... OK ! If really picky the weight but what do you expect
STUNNING....simply Stunning on a crop (7D) or a FF (5D3).
reviewed November 23rd, 2015(purchased for $2,299)
Have used for three years now for sports, events and some portrait work. The go to lens on most occasions has been this beauty.
Just today I sold my 300 F4 that was bought at the same time for 'sharp ' extra reach but it hardly saw action. (That was a good buy for some one @ $1050)
Instead I have used the 70-200mm with both 1.4X & 2X EXT iii's to get extra reach when needed, and even with a 1.4 this beautiful piece of kit beats the 300mm F4 hands down. With a 2x Ext its probably a dead heat except the 70-200 is longer.
If you are thinking about getting one just take a deep breathe and go for it! You won't be disappointed.
I still retain my 70-200mm F4 IS USM as a lightweight option when weight matters.... but whilst also brilliant , the F4 is not in the same league when it comes to resolution! Few things are !
http://www.hitsticker.com | http://www.adstateagent.com | http://www.printradiant.com - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbymariuspavel(5 reviews)price - better IS on Mark 2 version
I tested this lens a week ago and it looks and performs good, but i prefer Mark 2 version that i own.
reviewed July 19th, 2014(purchased for $2,000)
Pictures a took with this lens: www.mariuspavel.ro/foto-nunta-zarnesti-eliza-si-cornel/ - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyDanno(2 reviews)Fragile hood
Bought this lens second hand from a shop yesterday.
reviewed May 18th, 2014(purchased for $1,225)
I wanted to buy the 4IS, but bought this lens instead.
Despite reports of this lens not being sharp at 200mm, I find this lens sufficiently sharp at 2.8. Yesterday I was carrying my gear through an afternoon of shopping with wife and daughter to test the weight. I find the lens less heavy than expected. Most people complain too much?
I have tested this lens against 200mm F/2.8 fixed and the 70-200mm F/4 IS. The 70-200mm 2.8 gave nicer colours than the fixed 200mm. The 4IS was boring, as I don't see the point of buying a lens similar to my 24-105L. What would I gain by spending so much money? The 70-200 2.8 is really special, I don't care about weight.
Today I shot at the first commune of a friends daughter. Light was challenging, but with a 2.8 it was fine. With the 4IS I wouldn't have such nice photos, your lens can stabilise, but you won't stabilise children.
I do miss stabilisation in low light of it's expensive brother, but I spend much less now and wait with that investment.
Excellent lens, build quality, image quality including colours, just awesome. I have the 85mm F/1.8, in low light colours change, the 70-200 shows good colour and contrast at 2.8 so important. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyJRenato(5 reviews)Nada.
Zoom de Qualidade Superior.
reviewed January 13th, 2012
Exelente em todas as distâncias focais.
Nitidez e Contastes Irretocáveis.
Foco de Altíssima Velocidade.
Talvez o Melhor zoom 70x200 2.8 !!!!! - 8 out of 10 pointsand not recommendedbytouristguy87(33 reviews)the obvious: size, weight, limited focal-length range...cost...
I had this lens for a week. It's just not all that much. Aside from the obvious stuff like the weight (it's about the weight of a freaking cinderblock) and the size (it's like carrying around your forearm, though it will fit in a backpack), it has a few sneaky cons to it. But I will sum it up by saying that if you need this lens then you will deal with the cons (and they are numerous), if you don't really need this lens, then you will happily return it.
reviewed September 12th, 2009(purchased for $1,500)
The question is, how do you know that you really need this lens before you actually buy one and hump it out to the field and take shots?
Well, the only outstanding reason I can see to buy this lens is if you need a 70-200mm F2.8 zoom and nothing else will do. The IS is superfluous because while it's neat to take 200mm handheld shots at F2.8, handholding this lens gets old fast, and with good technique you can do that with a Tamron 28-300VC at 1/8s or so, which is a far more friendly carry than this lens. So it's the sheer speed and bokeh at F2.8 that justifies this lens. Or maybe you're shooting film, for some reason, and need every ounce of speed that you can get. And true, at F2.8 wide open you get some extra focus-precision with Canon cameras. So yeah if you need a good 200mm F2.8 lens, then this is the ticket.
Otherwise the 70-200 F4 and a whole lot of other options make more sense.
In which case you're just going to buy it regardless. Unless you're thinking of switching to Nikon, because if you're that hung-up on SNR you're probably going to switch to a D700, D3 or D3X too. I think, though, that after lugging this sucker around a few times & dealing with its limited FL range you will try very hard to find another way to get the shot without using this lens. Or else you will wish for the 200mm F2.0 or even the F1.8 (at...$4500 new). But I think that most shooters will want either a faster, shorter lens or a faster, cleaner camera or a combination of the two and some NR. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyAljoschaNiko(3 reviews)Already very sharp at f/3.2, excellent build quality, good handling
As I got to shot pictures the first time with this lens, I felt that 'High level' of this lens. It's really professional and very good in build quality and optical performance. But on my exemplar, the sharpness at 200mm just begins at f/5.6 and the 'wow' effect of sharpness is at f/8. I expected to be a little bit sharper wide open. But when it's sharp and when you get one team with your lens, you can really produce awesome results! I highly recommend it to every one who needs excellent build quality and excellent optical performance as well as in low light situations!
reviewed May 23rd, 2009(purchased for $1,268) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbytanglefoot47(2 reviews)None
I love this lens I have owned all the 70-200 and settled with this non IS. It's fast, great for LL sports
reviewed January 30th, 2009(purchased for $950) - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyAndy__(1 reviews)A bit heavy
This is an excellent lens all round I think. I have owned mine for about 3 months and couldn't be happier.
reviewed December 6th, 2008(purchased for $899)
I have taken pics at two motorsport events and the results have been stunning. Sharpness, detail and colour are outstanding. Thought about the IS model but decided for an extra $700 USD it wasn't worth it. Not for an enthusiuast like myself anyway.
This has been an excellent purchase for myself and I highly recommened this lens. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyPsiBurn(8 reviews)heavy [but not as heavy as I thought it would be], attention drawer
My first L, and I couldn't be any happier.
reviewed May 8th, 2008(purchased for $1,190)
This lens is built well, albeit without weather seals, but from what I can see, can take a good beating. That, and the images it produces, are some of the many reasons I got this over other competing 70-200 models.
It's still taking me some time to handle the lens properly as it is quite heavy, but it is not as heavy as I thought it would be, if not, quite well balanced, esp. w/ a battery grip on a 20D/30D. That, and ppl's eyes are seriously drawn to this lens...
Overall, I'm glad I got this lens. I thought about the f/2.8 IS and the f/4 IS, but after what happened to my 17-55 f/2.8 and the IS mechanism bugging out on me, I wanted to stay away from IS for a bit and was very glad Canon still made this model, even after over a decade. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbySea Dragon Rex(5 reviews)Very sharp lens. Fast silent focus. Beautiful bokeh
This is an awesome lens. It is very sharp and the bokeh is incredible. It is built like a tank and the only reason I don't rate it 10 in build quality is because it doesn't have a weather seal at the base.
reviewed January 7th, 2008(purchased for $1,033)
It is a big heavy lens so you have to get used to the weight. It also attracts a lot of attention because of the size and color. I've used this lens with my XT and 40D and love it with either camera (though it feels better balanced on the 40D). - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyfergusonjr(15 reviews)Incredible Image Quality. Big Aperture. Superior Build-Quality. Super Smooth Controls
I'm not quite sure how this lens could possibly be any better, except for the addition of IS. This is a phenomenal lens. I didn't add the price to the list of Cons, because at $1,100 I think this lens is a pure bargain.
reviewed January 19th, 2007
Like the 70-200 f/4L, the zoom and focus rings on this lens are as smooth as butter. This lens feels exceptionally tight and solid.
In comparison to the f/4 lens, I had expected that this f/2.8 lens would have some trade-offs and downsides as result of its larger aperture. But I was wrong. This lens produces the same incredible images with the same fantastic sharpness as the f/4 lens, even down to f/2.8. I expected at least to see some kind drop-off in edge-sharpness, but I was wrong. This lens is perfect.
The f/2.8 really makes a difference for achieving faster exposures without having to up the ISO. We're talking about being able to capture at twice the shutter speed. I did some quick tests of trying some stop-action captures, and the difference between f/2.8 and f/4 in many cases resulted in getting the shot and not getting the shot . . . one picture stopped and sharp, one picture kinda stopped and slightly blurred. To me, the f/2.8 makes this a feasible indoor lens, although I haven't had a chance to test it in indoors to a great extent. Another benefit of the larger aperture on this lens is that the background blur (bokeh) is even smoother and deeper than on the f/4. You'd certainly expect this to be the case, but the blur on the f/4 is already nice enough such that you don't necessarily think about looking forward to it on the f/2.8 . . . but once you see it, you notice it!
I really cannot imagine how this lens could be improved, except perhaps by the addition of IS (which you can get for an additional $600!), or by the addition of another 100mm of zoom. I suspect that Canon found a a sweet spot here with the 70-200, where they could achieve a very useful, fairly wide-range zoom without any compromises. The addition of another 100mm would probably make the lens suffer in some way or another, either in sharpness or CA . . . not to mention size and weight, especially at f/2.8. No, this lens is perfect.
It's important to note that this is Canon's one and only f/2.8 telephoto-zoom lens, and the level of care they've put into making this their flagship telephoto-zoom is evident. It's perfect . . . did I mention that already?
The only slight negative I can think of mentioning for this lens is the weight. It is about twice as heavy as the f/4 lens, and it's certainly noticeable. The f/4 is about the same weight as the Rebel, and it feels nicely balanced on that body . . . it's almost a perfect match. The f/2.8 is roughly twice the weight of the Rebel, and the balance definitely changes toward the lens. It's hefty enough to make you start thinking about whether you should be attaching your shoulder/neck strap to the lens rather than the camera. So, this is a little compromise, but the performance on this lens is so phenomenal, you forget about the added weight pretty quickly. - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbysix100(10 reviews)Prime-like overall image quality (simply beautiful and sharp images). Impressive bokeh. Usefull 1.5m minimal distance focus switch. "L standard" 77mm filter thread. Best USM lens I ever used, period.Price, but you get what you pay for (worth every penny). White...but you get used to it and in the end you start loving it. The original hood is very expensive.
My best lens ever. If you hear someone say 'the image quality is similar to primes' believe him. It is a prime with a 70-200 range.
reviewed January 8th, 2007(purchased for $1,200)
This lens produce an impressive bokeh, one of the best I've seen. And what can be said about USM...it's just addictive. Fast, silent and precise. Once you try it, you don't want to go back to anything else.
One thing to note about this lens is the price for a replacement hood (ET-83II). I bought this lens second hand and since the hood had some marks over it but the rest of the lens was mint I decided to go and buy a new hood just to match the awesome conservation of the lens. 45 bucks was the cheapest I could find...if you add the delivery cost to that you have a lot of money for a piece of plastic...of course you can get a 77mm hood from some other brand...if you don't mind going < 100% original. Besides that and the 1k+ price tag, this is a dream lens to have. I would only replace it with a bigger range lens with similar performance.
Some pics taken with it:
http://www.deviantart.com/view/32909643/
http://www.deviantart.com/view/32871123/
http://www.deviantart.com/view/32870946/
http://www.deviantart.com/view/32725524/
http://www.deviantart.com/view/32628862/ - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbysamo(4 reviews)Heavy, expensive.
The ultimate event lens. I use this baby to shoot weddings, mounted on a 5D, and boy it delivers. It's really sharp even wide open, with very good contrast and color, autofocus is fast and accurate. My keeper rate is very high. On the downside, it's heavy and feels unbalanced without the battery grip, so add more weight to the formula.
reviewed January 1st, 2007(purchased for $1,140)
This is one of the best midrange tele-zooms in Canon's lineup, just be careful using it if you have a bad back. - 0 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyMarkW(1 reviews)
I have another question since I only bought this lens yesterday I haven't been able to try it out. However, what is the difference (if there is any) that my lens body's color is off-white whereas I only see clear white sample pictures on the internet?? Who's got any ideas?
reviewed December 16th, 2006
Thanks - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbykwk36(5 reviews)none
I must admit I was less than impressed with my first images from this lens. I am not new to photography but I am new to autofocus. My other lenses have been forgiving of my AF ignorance. This lens however, showed me that autofocus, like any other tool, must be learned and used correctly. My problem was keeping the focus point in use on fast moving subjects and using the correct focus mode for the subject. Once I got this through my head I have found my images to be good and sharp. This is a well made lens with great performance and it made all the difference in getting the shots I needed on my last shoot. I didn't even consider the IS version. I guess I'm still a little too 'old school' for that. I can't see why anybody would regret buying this lens, it's top notch.
reviewed December 10th, 2006 - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyMichael LV(3 reviews)Heavy
Excellent resolution, color and contrast even on F#2.8 in mid field. With aperture from 5.6 full field is great, considering it is a Zoom.
reviewed December 6th, 2006(purchased for $1,200)
A bit too heavy but it makes a good return on effort to carry.
Overall I am very happy with this Lens and will not give it away. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyLawrence88(5 reviews)none
What more can be said about this lens? It's one of the main workhorse of many professionals. I use mine mainly to cover events/concerts/publicity events/etc with superb results. You can't beat the bokeh except with the fast long primes, but then they won't be flexible. In the beginning my focusing sight shakes a little from holding it although most of the time it will not usually affect image sharpness in the end (I am spoiled by IS I guess) but after getting the lowepro slingshot 200 AW I can use it for handholding. I use monopod also but in some events it is not easily setup given the situation.
reviewed November 24th, 2006(purchased for $1,100)
Some people say the weight is a problem but it's really not that heavy. Of course it will be a different story if you hold it all day... Get a nice shoulder strap for your camera for an easier time lugging it around...
Is the IS worth the extra $500? Maybe but I chose to go without and got an extra lens with the savings instead... Or you can go get a flash with the savings to freeze motion in available light. You will do fine in daylight with it. - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbytheoak(7 reviews)No IS.
I love this lens, and use it a lot. All of Canon's 70-200s are great lenses.
reviewed November 20th, 2006
I do wish that I had put the cost of this lens towards the IS version instead of buying this one. This shouldn't reflect poorly on this lens, but I shoot in low light a lot and it would be nice to do so at smaller aperture with IS. - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyddesimoni(12 reviews)none
this is my normal walk around lens, works great with the canon 1.4 extender.
reviewed November 18th, 2006(purchased for $1,100)
Do I miss IS, NO, having seen resolution test of this lens versus the IS, I decided to pick this lens. Have I missed a few shoots with the IS, sure, is it worth the difference in cost and lower resolution, NO. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedby r0nald(2 reviews)Long and heavy.
This lens is my money maker (I'm a wannabe Pro photographer). I shoot cycling races and this lens gets the job done. Since all of the bikes races I shoot occur during the day 'IS' wasn't such a big factor when I choose the non-IS version. I figure I would not carry the extra 'IS' weight around and save $. This lens is still quite capable in low light situations with an aperture of f2.8. The 70-200 f2.8 is very sharp and has a very fast USM AF - makes my job a whole lot easier and very enjoyable.
reviewed November 16th, 2006(purchased for $1,049) - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyRoss T(4 reviews)None
This is an Awesome Lens...I've had mine for 10 yrs....Fantastic Portrait Lens...BEAUTIFUL Bokeh....Incredibly SHARP...FAST...Spends more time on my camera than any other lens!!
reviewed October 13th, 2006 - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbyhellofacanon(3 reviews)Almost none
This lens is very much comparable to a prime.
reviewed February 16th, 2006
USM AF is VERY fast and is perfect for indoor sports.
Very good portrait lens too. - 10 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbymagicbutton(2 reviews)weight/size
What can you say that hasn't already been said about this lens? It's as close to a perfect mid-range telephoto as you'll ever find.
reviewed December 3rd, 2005(purchased for $1,100)
I'll never sell it.
Construction is very solid and has resisted any wearing or chips on the body that come from long hours of use.
This is not a 'weatherized' model though and no gasket is on the mount if that matters to you.
The 2.8 has been critical for me to have and I would have missed shots if I had gone with the cheaper f/4 version. I have been happy with all my 2.8 shots in all lighting conditions for sharpness. In fact, I am continually amazed at the shots that I get with this lens.
Have seen some posters( on other boards) mention that the color of this lens attracts muggers, etc. This is silly to me. A mugger is just gonna see that you have a SLR-like camera. It doesn't matter if you have a black lens or a pink one. Don't let the white color discourage you. In my experience, I have traveled internationally with this lens and walked in all manner of places with no issues ( I know... might have been luck, I doubt it though) . You just need to use your head irregardless if you have a $200 lens attached or this one!
Length and weight of this lens make it a challenge to use on long days or in crowded areas. But, choosing gear is a compromise. I'll gladly sweat a little more or move a little slower to get my images captured with this lens. Most of my 'wow' photos come from this lens.
It's an amazing bit of hardware. - 9 out of 10 pointsand recommendedbymdbassman(5 reviews)A Tad heavy
Great zoom lense. Sharp images at all ranges and great contrast. On 5d very little corner vignetting on some images and none on others.
reviewed November 2nd, 2005(purchased for $1,000)
- Navigate ReviewJump to review page...