# Should I choose the 70-200 2.8 II?



## Jack56 (Dec 18, 2013)

Dear all,
How difficult life can be. This afternoon I want to make a decision. I will visit the shop and go for the Mark5dIII.
There is a little voice in me whispering why not the 6d? Well, I think go for the 5dIII because you neer know what to shoot in the future.
I've read so much about the 70-200 2.8 (new version). Heavy, but sharp. I know this will be my longest zoom and, visiting Scotland and Shetland, in the nearby feature I will buy extenders to give it a bit more reach. 
Should I buy this lens, because the lens will be fast enough with the extenders or should I pick the f.4?
Or is the lens really to heavy and will stay at home too much?
Thank you for reading!


----------



## Menace (Dec 18, 2013)

If you can afford it, its the correct focal length for what you need it for then by all means get asap.

You'll love it!

Regards to weight, mine is attached to my gripped 5DIII with a black rapid strap and I can carry it all day long. (i'm slight built 5'6" male).


----------



## TrabimanUK (Dec 18, 2013)

Just do it! (no trademark intended)

It is an awesome lense, my wife has one and occasionally I am allowed to use it. 

Sharp and fast, a tad heavy, but the extra few humdred grammes are so worth it


----------



## rs (Dec 18, 2013)

From what I know, the f4 IS version is a really great lens. If f4 is all you'll ever need (and f5.6 or f8 with a 1.4x and 2x TC), then it'll do for you. 

However, the 2.8 IS version II is simply stunning. There are only two problems with it - it's price (only you know if you can afford it), and it's weight. I'd suggest finding one in a shop and use it for a bit to see if it's the sort of weight you could use. 

Whenever I've got my camera with me, mine is either mounted to the body or in the bag. I wouldn't dream of going out shooting without it.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 18, 2013)

Jack56 said:


> How difficult life can be. This afternoon I want to make a decision. I will visit the shop and go for the Mark5dIII.
> There is a little voice in me whispering why not the 6d? Well, I think go for the 5dIII because you neer know what to shoot in the future.



Good decision if you've got the money and don't want the smallest possible ff dslr.



Jack56 said:


> Should I buy this lens, because the lens will be fast enough with the extenders or should I pick the f.4?



General advice on this: Don't buy a lens because you intend to regularly use it with extenders, tc are for occasional use and of course very useful for travel.



Jack56 said:


> Or is the lens really to heavy and will stay at home too much?



Consider this purchase *very* carefully - the 70-200/2.8 is a no-brainer for pro photogs that make money from it, want the quickest & best depth of field / image quality combination and don't care about bulk or weight. As it has excellent quality it's also the gearhead's choice looking at test charts and 100% crop magnification.

But(!) for the rest of us don't underestimate the weight of this, due to the length it creates a lot of torsion on the wrist and needs good camera handling. As an internal zoom. it also has no "packing" zoomed in position and takes a lot of space in the bag, even one of the CR regulars who can afford just about any lens has recently added a shorter and lighter 70-300L for travel purposes.

My advice: Consider if you really need this "all in one" package, the alternative is for example to buy a longer 70-300L and a prime that is faster than f2.8 or maybe the 100L macro which is also f2.8 but gives you more shooting options.


----------



## Jack56 (Dec 18, 2013)

Thank you all for your replies.
This afternoon I went to the shop and bought me a Mark5dIII.
Pfff, decision made.
At that time I had just ten minutes left for discussing the lens.
The very helpful assistant recommended the 16-35 and the 70-200 f.4.
The 2.8 felt heavy, but ad a good feel. The 16-35 well-built as well.
I was too excited buying the mark5dIII that I couldn't made another decision.
Well, maybe friday the next chance and if not, I will try to play with the camera with my 100mm L lens.
Thank you for your comments!


----------



## jointdoc (Dec 18, 2013)

If you plan to take this on a trip I would recommend you rent the 70-200 f2.8 II and carry it around with the 5D Mark III all day and see how you feel at the end of the day. I have this lens and love the images but it IS HEAVY to carry around all day on a trip. I am considering a 70-300 f/4-5.6L for travel it is 1 lb lighter and I don't shoot wide open as much for travel pictures. I can't imagine the image quality of the 70-300 will come close to the 70-200 but it is heavy to carry all day. If you plan to use an extender you might do better with a 70-300 it depends on what you plan to shoot. I sure you will get a lot more opinions.


----------



## cayenne (Dec 18, 2013)

Jack56 said:


> Dear all,
> How difficult life can be. This afternoon I want to make a decision. I will visit the shop and go for the Mark5dIII.
> There is a little voice in me whispering why not the 6d? Well, I think go for the 5dIII because you neer know what to shoot in the future.
> I've read so much about the 70-200 2.8 (new version). Heavy, but sharp. I know this will be my longest zoom and, visiting Scotland and Shetland, in the nearby feature I will buy extenders to give it a bit more reach.
> ...



Simple. If you can afford the 5D3 and the 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS...*yes*, get them.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 18, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> My advice: Consider if you really need this "all in one" package, the alternative is for example to buy a longer 70-300L and a prime that is faster than f2.8 or maybe the 100L macro which is also f2.8 but gives you more shooting options.



+1. The 70-300L is a better travel lens than the 70-200 II. If it will be your only lens in the focal range, then the 70-200 II is more versatile: sports, portraits, etc. -- it can pretty much do it all. You'll just be at a weight and size disadvantage for travel. It also comes down to how you intend to travel with your gear. If you're carrying the telephoto in a backpack most of the time and you're using the 70-200 at select locations, then it won't make as much of a difference.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 18, 2013)

Jack56 said:


> Dear all,
> How difficult life can be. This afternoon I want to make a decision. I will visit the shop and go for the Mark5dIII.
> There is a little voice in me whispering why not the 6d? Well, I think go for the 5dIII because you neer know what to shoot in the future.
> I've read so much about the 70-200 2.8 (new version). Heavy, but sharp. I know this will be my longest zoom and, visiting Scotland and Shetland, in the nearby feature I will buy extenders to give it a bit more reach.
> ...



Congrats on your toy 

70-200 f2.8 IS II is Canon BEST zoom. Weight and size shouldn't be a huge issue compared to f4 or 70-300mm L. Your 5D III body is bigger than 6D, therefore, the 70-200 f2.8 IS ii feels better and more balance.

If budget is not issue, f2.8 version II is the way to go. IQ on current 70-300mm L & 100-400mm L is NOT considered as "Wow" yet.


----------



## Andy_Hodapp (Dec 18, 2013)

If you are just going to be shooting at the long end all the time, I would recommend going for the 200mm F/2.8 II. I do a lot of landscapes and when I do want to go wide, I often find myself using this lens to create panoramas because it is so sharp and has very little distortion. It is as sharp or sharper then the amazing 70-200mm 2.8 IS II. The downside is no IS but being light weight, it is less of a problem. Auto focus is incredibly fast and accurate on my mkii, something I can't say about any of my other lesses really. The bokeh it produces looks incredible. The lens is also not a big white, so you can go a little more unnoticed. Here are some shots with the lens to show how sharp it is.


----------



## goldencode (Dec 18, 2013)

It was the Canon 70-200 f2.8 II lens THAT made me jump ship to Canon. And I am one very happy photographer.
I shoot it on a 7D, 1DIV and 5D3 and it is simply awesome. Buy once, buy right.


----------



## wsmith96 (Dec 18, 2013)

yes, you should buy that lens.


----------



## Pinchers of Peril (Dec 18, 2013)

This lens is freaking awesome. Everybody likes to talk about the weight and it is pretty heavy, but honestly it balances out the 5dIII really well. Just keep using it and your arms will get strong and then you can work your way up to a 600mm and it'll be nothin'


----------



## qwRad (Dec 18, 2013)

Hi, the 70-200 + 5D3 is a killer combo but here is my opinion:

I have both the 70-200 2.8 II and the 70-300L + the 5D3. I rarely take the 70-200 with me if i'm going on a vacation or a trip. It is just too heavy for hiking/carrying around all day. The 70-300L is much better in this regard and as a bonus it's longer. If you add a 24-105 or 24-70 you won't need anything else for general purpose shooting.

The image quality is of course a bit better on the 70-200 (especially when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8) but mainly noticeable in the corners. For situations other than very dark dawn or dusk or pixel peeping test chart shots the 70-300L will deliver quite good enough image quality compared to the 70-200 and does so in a much more travel friendly package. The IS and AF are also on the same level in my opinion. You can also ad a 1.4x Kenko TC but I've found almost no difference just cropping the image.

Then again the 70-200 will be used exclusively when I'm shooting an event, a wedding, sports indoors or portraits. But these will be things I will go to shoot for one or a couple of days as the main thing and not a holiday or a trip.

So in my opinion it depends on your shooting needs. If you plan to use the lens as a general purpose tele on vacations and trips then go for the 70-300L and maybe buy a 50/85 f/1.8 or a macro to accompany it. But if you must have the best IQ in a zoom or need the low light cabapilities for event/indoor shooting and are prepared to carry the weight around if you occasionally use it as a general purpose lens then go for the 70-200.

Or you can do what I did and end up getting both


----------



## sunnyVan (Dec 18, 2013)

I think you should wait and have fun with the 100L first. Then borrow or rent someone's 70-200 2.8 and make a decision. If you ask whether this is a great lens the answer is yes. If you want to know whether this is for you, only you know that answer. I'd rather have the f4 version plus a 135L. Now that I have 100L I may not even need my telezoom. Again everyone is different and you need to decide for yourself. I once borrowed the 2.8 from a friend. I think it's wonderful for events and pretty impractical for travel and hiking.


----------



## Quasimodo (Dec 18, 2013)

sunnyVan said:


> I think you should wait and have fun with the 100L first. Then borrow or rent someone's 70-200 2.8 and make a decision. If you ask whether this is a great lens the answer is yes. If you want to know whether this is for you, only you know that answer. I'd rather have the f4 version plus a 135L. Now that I have 100L I may not even need my telezoom. Again everyone is different and you need to decide for yourself. I once borrowed the 2.8 from a friend. I think it's wonderful for events and pretty impractical for travel and hiking.



+1

Sunnyvan makes a lot of sense here. I have it, and as everyone agrees upon, it is a superb lens, ... but so are other lenses. I use it less and less, and tend to have more fun with my primes, eg. 35, 85, and especially my favorite lens the 135L. The latter, once you´ve tried it never leaves you


----------



## mwh1964 (Dec 19, 2013)

Have both the 70-300L and 70-200 v2 as I could not decide. I still can't and tend to bring both. I would live happily ever after with either if I could choose only one.


----------



## TexasBadger (Dec 19, 2013)

You should consider the 70-200 f2.8 v1. It is a great lens and a good used one will not only save you money, it will hold it's value if you decide to resell it later. I am very happy with mine and have no desire to go to v2.


----------



## Pixel (Dec 19, 2013)

The EF70-200 2.8L IS II and the EF24-70 2.8L II are the two FINEST zoom lenses EVER MADE. The literally have no equals or competition. They're worth their weight in gold. I can't recommend either of them any higher. I used to love shooting with my fast prime L lenses for their amazing IQ. I literally can't tell you the last time I used any of them.


----------



## FTb-n (Dec 19, 2013)

Best advice I ever got was "never buy a lens until you actually need it." So, do you need the 70-200 range? Do you need the 2.8 speed? Do you need IS? (Can you afford it?)

Now, the 70-200 is a very versatile range on full frame. The 2.8 offers great subject seperation. And the IS further extends its versatility for both creative slow shutter speed shots and hand holding during low light event work. This is my most used lens and will likely outlast my 5D3. If you have a need for the 70-200 range, get this lens.


----------



## cyclrraw (Dec 19, 2013)

As almost everyone has mentioned the 70-200 2.8 II is an AWESOME lens. I also USE TO own the 70-300 but was so disappointed with the image quality I sold it. The 70-200 II with a 1.4tc is sharper than the 70-300. Go for the right lens the first time, I wish I would have.


----------



## AudioGlenn (Dec 19, 2013)

wsmith96 said:


> yes, you should buy that lens.



+1


----------



## Grumbaki (Dec 19, 2013)

Pixel said:


> They're worth their weight in gold.



Was that pun on purpose?


----------



## CarpetFeet (Dec 19, 2013)

Jack56 said:


> Dear all,
> How difficult life can be. This afternoon I want to make a decision. I will visit the shop and go for the Mark5dIII.
> There is a little voice in me whispering why not the 6d? Well, I think go for the 5dIII because you neer know what to shoot in the future.
> I've read so much about the 70-200 2.8 (new version). Heavy, but sharp. I know this will be my longest zoom and, visiting Scotland and Shetland, in the nearby feature I will buy extenders to give it a bit more reach.
> ...



Jack56, if you want to see what a 5Diii and 70-200 f4L IS look like together in Shetland, check out my flickr set  from a trip there this July.

Good luck deciding and have an awesome trip!


----------



## arbitrage (Dec 19, 2013)

For over 2 years now, I've had the 70-200 f/2.8 II IS sitting in my shopping cart at various retailers but I never pulled the trigger....always talked myself out of it.....well 3 weeks ago I finally took the plunge.....long story, short.....lens is friggin awesome. I now go out with a dual BR strap....5D3 70-200 on one side, 1DX and 300II on the other side. It is my hiking for wildlife/landscape setup. I prefer tighter landscape shots over the wide angle stuff so 70mm is enough for me on FF. I also bring along both my TCs for added versatility. I love this lens and how well it compliments my high-end longer glass.

Now the only problem is the 24-70II is now sitting in my shopping cart!!!! ;D


----------



## Smurf1811 (Dec 19, 2013)

I've sold mine yesterday after sleeping 6 months in my cupboard 

Since i've got my 200mm 2.0 i never used the Zoom again ;D

+1 for the 135mm for trevelling (and for anything else)


----------



## Vivid Color (Dec 19, 2013)

cyclrraw said:


> As almost everyone has mentioned the 70-200 2.8 II is an AWESOME lens. I also USE TO own the 70-300 but was so disappointed with the image quality I sold it. The 70-200 II with a 1.4tc is sharper than the 70-300. Go for the right lens the first time, I wish I would have.



I wonder if the above poster is talking about the 70-300 non-L lens because the 70-300L yields fantastic image quality.


----------



## Menace (Dec 19, 2013)

arbitrage said:


> Now the only problem is the 24-70II is now sitting in my shopping cart!!!! ;D



I hope you won't wait another two years to get the AWESOME 24-70 2.8 II ;D


----------



## Jack56 (Dec 20, 2013)

Thank you all for your advices. I think I will try to get friends with my new camera the next few weeks.
I will use my 100mm L, I know the limits, but I still got my 60d.
From that point onwards I will make the next step.
Thanks again!


----------



## scotia (Dec 21, 2013)

If you are planning on travelling around the UK by air it is worth thinking very carefully about weight; carry-on luggage limits in the UK sometimes come as a surprise to people accustomed to more generous allowances. Any carry-on allowance is likely to include a laptop unless you are travelling on a premium ticket. This is why I will probably get a 70-200 f4, though I would love the f2.8 for indoor sport. At least check what the airline permits and whether this makes a difference. 

If you are planning to cross to Shetland by ferry from Aberdeen (good luck!) then there shouldn't be a problem with weight restrictions.


----------



## nc0b (Dec 21, 2013)

I have both the 70-200 2.8 II and the 70-200 f/4 version. If I am shooting an indoor event, the f/2.8 is my choice every time. If I am just walking around a lake at a park, shooting people, dogs and birds, then the f/4.0 is just fine. The f/2.8 wide open is sharper than the f/4 wide open, so I tend to shoot the f/4 at 5.6. Both take the 1.4X TC III when needed. While I have 4 bodies, if I am shooting BIF, my best results have been with my 6D and 400mm f/5.6. I don't know why some people complain about the 6D and focus.


----------

