oleairman Loc: athens ga

question new and I was wanting to buy this lens but $$$ man is there one you may recommend that is same speed and durable as this..???

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Hello and welcome,

You are chasing one of the best lenses ever made. It is expensive, if you buy new. Alternatives may include Canon USA refurbished lenses, used equipment vendors, and 3rd party brands. Canon refurbs are very popular for several reasons, the most important are the Benjamins involved. The lens is listed in Canon's catalogue at $2099.00 new, and $1679.20 for a refurbished version. Serious canon users are well aware of refurbs and use them frequently. Canon markets certain lenses as refurbs for several reasons, the bottom line is savings for the user. They include a 1 year warranty. There are several good businesses when dealing in used gear. Among them are Adorama, B&H, , and KEH. The more you know the better your position when dealing in used. All three of these dealers have very high reputations and are no-hassle in their policies. An important feature is the rating system each dealer uses. My personal experience has been that the dealers rate lower than the item actually reflects. I purchased a 300mm Canon from KEH that was rated very good, and was unable to find a flaw with the lens. In most cases if the item is junk the rating reflects as such. Some are even advertised as "nuts and bolts".

The lens you desire is too good for you to accept a poor copy. Buy new and you have a higher chance for a "perfect" copy. Buy used and your chances are not as high, but you can improve your odds by researching the selling agency and the item listing. Each of the three dealers listed have their own in-house warranties, and each is more than willing to sell "add-on
" insurance. GL

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Buy it new and from an authorized dealer... And you'll have it, love it and hold it for the rest of your life. For this type of lens, there is none better anywhere. It is however, BIG and HEAVY, and not subtle.
You can also use it as a thermos when not shooting with it :lol:
welcome to the UHH! It's fun here. :thumbup:

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Not likely!!
The Nikon is probably a close second if you can get it on your camera!! :lol:
The other off-brands are pulling up the rear!!!
If you can get away with f4, the non IS version is almost as good, you'd not likely see a diff and it's only about 1/3 the price!
Just saying! ;-)
SS

MichaelJonesImages Loc: Newburgh,NY

This article doesn't discuss durability but shows testing on the 70-200 and third party lenses.

http://petapixel.com/2015/03/28/just-the-lenses-the-great-200mm-shoot-out/

Tamron and I think Sigma make cheaper versions that are still 2.8 lenses at much lower price. I think they are good quality but don't offer the weather sealing of the canon.

If you don't need the 2.8 the Canon 70-200 f4 IS is about 1/2 the price and weight is very good performance. Or if you are shooting sports or other things with high shutter speed and don't need the IS you could get the 70-200 2.8 no IS again for almost 1/2 the cost.

I own the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS, and don't regret buying it for a minute. I have probably taken 30-40k (maybe more)pictures with it with no problems. It has very fast focus.

A friend had the Sigma 70-200 2.8 with IS for about $1200, picture quality was great, although I think after 1-2 years the IS was not working.

The nice thing with the 70-200 2.8 is I can also use a 1.4 or 2x converter and have up to a 140-400 f5.6 with converter and still have autofocus. pair this with a crop sensor and you get a very good range. I notice autofocus speed slows with the 2x converter.

I used it on a 7d and now Canon 7d mark 2.

I always thought the sharpness was off a small amount on the 70-200. A friend of mine bought the lens align with focus tune software and turns out my camera lens combination was forward focusing. I needed about +10 adjustment on the lens micro adjust feature on camera. Wow big difference in sharpness.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Take davidrb's suggestion and visit KEH looking instead for the original version with an EX or EX+ rating. The II is widely recognized as the best, but the original was no slouch.

Anandnra Loc: Tennessee

My suggestion ... if you happen to try it out anywhere (rental or borrow) at all you will not want another as there's none other like this one. Simply a superb lens.

Chris F. Loc: San Francisco

This lens is one of my all time favorites. I use mine frequently and have no issues.

Chris

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

That's kind of like asking "What else does Chevy make that performs like the Corvette?".
There is the Mk I version of the lens. It lacks IS, but in every other way is nearly equal to the Mk II, but for a lot less money. I shot one the other day for the first time and got some very good results. Didn't seem that heavy to me, but I usually shoot with a 100-400 L II. Just swapped with a friend while we were out shooting one day. Very nice lens. I would go with that before I would consider any third party lenses.

cheineck Loc: Hobe Sound, FL

Hate to say it, but my Tamron 70-200 2.8, etc. comes within 2% of the the Canon's quality at a heck of a lot cheaper price.

jwestman Loc: Grand Rapids, MI

This is a stunning lens. That said, when I went to buy it the store was very busy so I walked around with it on the camera for awhile. It is heavy! I opted for the F4 version and have been very happy with the results.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I would get this lens only if I ABSOLUTELY NEEDED the 2.8 aperture and did not mind carrying the weight. Then, to get my mony's worth out of the lens, and when I needed a longer/slower lens, I would put a 2X behind it to get to 400mm without buying another separate lens ! This is the ONLY 70-200 2.8 that will do a GOOD job of handling a 2X.

FWIW, this is also the only 70-200 2.8 that does NOT have significant focus breathing ie looses focal length as you focus closer - if that matters to you.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Canon EF 70-200/2.8L IS USM Mark II is probably the best of it's kind from any manufacturer. If you need the best and can deal with the high cost of admission ($2100), and are okay with the size and weight of the lens, you won't regret it. (Do go handle it in a store... to be sure you can live with the size and weight... I've lent my 70-200/2.8 to folks, who promptly decided to get one of the smaller/lighter f4 versions instead.)

About 2/3 the size and weight, and about $900 cheaper ($1200) is the EF 70-200/4L IS USM that comes very, very close to the image quality of the f2.8 Mark II. The f4 IS lens is the second newest model Canon offers, is similarly sharp wide open and has similarly capable image stabilization (3-4 stop).

The above two are the only Canon 70-200s (maybe the only from any manufacturers) to use a fluorite lens element, which is probably what's responsible for their extremely high image quality.

If you want f2.8 and can live with it's size and weight, but don't want to spend so much, you might look for a used/refurbished copy of the EF 70-200/2.8L IS USM "Mark I". It's discontinued now, but still a very good lens too, very near the top of the class. Used it will run $1300, $1200 or maybe a little less. Among the Canon I'd rank it third in image quality, very close to the 70-200/4 IS and probably tied with the 70-200/4 non-IS.

The f2.8 IS "Mark I" is not quite as sharp as the Mark II wide open. And the Mark II has newer type 3-4 stop stabilization, while the older version has 2-3 stop IS. The Mark II works better with teleconverters too (especially Canon's own Mark III TCs).

The 70-200/4L non-IS is pretty comparable to the f2.8 IS "Mark I's" image quality, focus performance and durability, but lacks stabilization (which feel is very much worth the extra cost on these telephotos). At about $650, it's the least expensive 70-200 that Canon offers.

The 70-200/2.8L non-IS is the oldest model and has the lowest image quality of the five 70-200s that Canon has offered, although it's actually still quite good. I wouldn't expect it to be very usable with teleconverters, due to loss of IQ. It's similar in size and weight to the other two f2.8 versions. If you must have f2.8 and can live without stabilization (I can't!), the $1350 price of this lens might be attractive to you.

One reason the f4 versions are cheaper than the f2.8 versions is that the f4 don't come with a tripod mounting ring. It's sold separately for about $150 (Canon OEM... there are third party clones for as little as $50). All the f2.8 lenses come with a tripod mounting ring included (removable, if you prefer to shoot without it).

The $1500 Tamron SP 70-200/2.8 VC USD has it's fans, too. VC is their version of stabilization (Canon IS) and USD is Tamron's version of ultrasonic focus drive (Canon USM). Tamron also offers a cheaper ($770) non-VC, non-USD version of this lens.

Some folks like the Sigma 70-200/2.8 OS HSM, too, which sells for about $1200. OS is stabilization (some say it's equal to or better than Canon's IS) and HSM is ultrasonic focus drive (Canon USM).

I haven't used the Tamron or Sigma lenses, so can't really compare them. Tokina is coming out with a 70-200/4... but AFAIK it's only available in Nikon mount at present.

I have used most of the Canon 70-200s at one time or another and currently have the 70-200/2.8L IS USM "Mark I" and 70-200/4L IS USM in my kit. They are among my most used lenses. The "Mark I" is one of my oldest, in fact. I bought it in 2001 when I switched to the Canon system.

All five of the Canon lenses are pro-grade "workhorses"... very durable, well sealed. They all are IF or "internal focusing/zooming". This means they don't extend, they remain the same size throughout both the zoom and focus ranges. Makes for better balance, though IF lenses are larger to start with, than a non-IF design might be.

All five of the Canon 70-200s are "L-series", which means that they are full frame capable and will work fine on crop sensor DSLRs as well. In fact, L-series are fully compatible with all EOS cameras past, present and future, according to Canon's definitions. Also, all L-series come with matched lens hoods. Most (including all the 70-200s) also come with a lens case. I rank the five Canon lenses this way:

#1: 70-200/2.8L IS USM Mark II (fluorite, excellent IQ, works well with TCs, 3-4 stop IS)
#2: 70-200/4L IS USM (fluorite, excellent IQ, works well with 1.4X TC, 3-4 stop IS)
#3 (tie): 70-200/2.8L IS USM "Mark I" (very good IQ, okay with 1.4X TC, 2-3 stop IS)
#3 (tie): 70-200/4L USM (very good IQ, okay with 1.4X)
#4: 70-200/2.8L USM (pretty darned good IQ)

Really all five Canon lenses are quite capable and built to pro standards. All have fast, accurate USM focus drive. The differences between them in image quality really aren't all that dramatic (you can compare on the-digital-picture.com). Pick the features (weight/size, price, IS or not, tripod ring or not) that you need/want.... pretty sure you'll be happy with it.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

The EF 100-400 L II also has a fluorite lens element.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_100_400mm_f_4_5_5_6l_is_ii_usm

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Yes, I know. So too do quite a few other Canon lenses (incl. EF 200-400/4 1.4X, EF 200/2L, EF 300/2.8L, EF 400/2.8L, etc.).

I thought we were discussing 70-200s. But since we're picking nits, I've edited my response to say "the only two Canon 70-200s with fluorite element".

In fact, Canon was among the pioneers manufacturing artificial fluorite and has long used it to good advantage in many of their premium lenses.

But so far they have only used it in two models of their EF 70-200s, which also happen to be the two sharpest of the bunch.



Incorrect... The 70-200/2.8 "Mark I" has IS. Though it's an older 2-3 stop version vs the 3-4 stop version on the Mark II. The Mark II has better/sharper IQ wide open (again, likely due to the addition of fluorite element), and works better with teleconverters. There are some other differences... The Mark II is a little closer focusing and gives slightly higher magnification.

There is also a non-IS version of the 70-200/2.8, still in production and has sold alongside both the f2.8 IS Mark I and Mark II, as well as the two f4 lenses. The 70-200/2.8 non-IS is the oldest 70-200mm model Canon offers, with the weakest IQ (though it's really still pretty darned good).

I'd recommend reading the review at http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx, as well as using that site's lens comparison tools to see for yourself the differences in IQ, both between the Canon versions and with the Sigma and Tamron alternatives.