warzone

I was considering purchasing a refurbed 70-200 from Canon for my M50. I am confused though and hope you can help. The newer version (III) costs less than the older version (II). The newer version boasts better coatings. Any ideas why it costs less?

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

The chances are excellent that Canon has the right answer.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

The 70-200 II is an outstanding lens. One of the best zooms ever made. By all reports the 70-200 III is just slightly better. The only difference the coatings seem to make is to reduce ghosting under certain conditions. I never ran into that problem with my II. As far as the price difference, it may just be that the newer design of the III makes it less expensive to overhaul. Just a guess. Since the III is every bit as good as the II, and slightly better in some ways, I would save some money and buy the III. There is none better in the 70-200 range.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Canon may be manipulating their pricing to feature the v III over the v II. Changes in the Dollar to Yen exchange rate may cause the lenses to have different costs internally for the refurbished specimens for sale today on May 2, 2020. If trying to sell off inventory, it would seem Canon has an error on their site. Who knows, only Canon.

warzone

Thanks everyone.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

I have the II and 5D III and 7D MII. Superb lens!! I think you'll need the adapter for the M50?
Mark

warzone

I have the Canon adapter. My original camera was the T5i. I purposely stayed with the Canon mirrorless so I could use my lenses.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

You are all set for 70 - 200 II or III. I doubt you'll be disappointed.
Enjoy,
Mark

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Interesting...

But, notice that the refurbished III is out of stock, while the II is currently available refurbished.

Probably the price of the III is out of date. When stock runs out at Canon USA, often the old price continues to be shown until more stock comes in. If/when they get in a new supply of them, they will probably cost more than the price currently offered for the II. Pricing of refurbished seems to be largely independent of their new pricing and various sale prices or instant rebate programs throughout the year.

OTOH, maybe that's not it at all.... I just noticed at B&H even brand new the III is selling for less than the II! List price of the III is $1899 and it's currently on sale for $100 off that. The list price of the II is $2099, and it's not currently discounted!

Although it appears to offer some nice savings in this case, refurbished isn't always the best deal. When I bought my two 7D Mark IIs, I was all set to buy refurbished, but then noticed the sale price at retailers was only a few dollars more and that "bundles" offered by some stores made sense for me. I got a free printer with one (Canon Pro-100, net value after mail-in rebate around $150) and a free external hard drive with the other (3TB G-Drive, similar value at the time). I was soon going to be buying those things anyway, so this was ideal for me.

Gotta be careful though, some of the less reputable retailers bundle junk and/or sell you "international warranty" or "store warranty" items (which are just ways of disguising "gray market", which essentially means "no warranty at all").

Totally different subject... You mention using on an M50. Have you handled any of the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses? They are pretty hefty! Around 3.25 lb. You're probably aware, you'll need an adapter to fit them to an M-series camera. By the time you do that, the little camera will seem pretty unbalanced on the camera. You might want to consider the 70-200mm f/4 IS USM II, as a possible alternative. It is close to 1/3 smaller size and 1/2 the weight of the f/2.8 versions. The f/4 lens sells without a tripod ring, which is included with the f/2.8 lenses. If you buy the option ring for the f/4, it will end up about 2/3 the weight of the f/2.8 lenses.

I've got both 70-200mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/4. I used the f/2.8 lens a lot in the past. The focal length range was ideal for a lot of things. When I had chance to buy the f/4 lens at a good price, I jumped on it to have it as a backup. But I find I now use the f/4 lens more often, for its smaller size and lighter weight. Over the years I've also lent my f/2.8 to several people to try out, and at least a couple of them have decided to buy the f/4 version instead due to the size and weight of the f/2.8.

I'm not saying this to discourage you from getting the f/2.8... just to make sure you aren't unprepared for how hefty it is and how it might feel with a small camera like the M50. (I just recently got an M5 and don't plan to use it with any of my EF/EF-S lenses for now... But if I do in the future, I'm pretty sure I'd use the 70-200 f/4 instead of the f/2.8.)

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Totally different subject... You mention using on an M50. Have you handled any of the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses? They are pretty hefty! Around 3.25 lb. You're probably aware, you'll need an adapter to fit them to an M-series camera. By the time you do that, the little camera will seem pretty unbalanced on the camera. You might want to consider the 70-200mm f/4 IS USM II, as a possible alternative. It is close to 1/3 smaller size and 1/2 the weight of the f/2.8 versions. The f/4 lens sells without a tripod ring, which is included with the f/2.8 lenses. If you buy the option ring for the f/4, it will end up about 2/3 the weight of the f/2.8 lenses.

I purchased the M50 adapter and three lenses in spring of 2017. I felt the same inbalance with my f/2.8 70-200 II lens on the M50. I returned the M50, adapter and three lenses and bought a Sony RX10 IV. I've hardly used the 5D MIII, 7D MII and two Canon f/2.8 lenses since purchasing the RX10 IV. Try before buying.

Good luck,
Mark

warzone

Thank you everyone for such detailed responses. It is a lot to think about. I'd love to have the new 70-200 specifically for the mirrorless cameras, but it won't fit either of my cameras. And I'm not ready for a newer camera.

User ID

General rule of adapting is that you adapt SLR lenses to live view bodies and do not adapt lenses between different live view bodies. It’s all about the flange to sensor depth.

swamy69