# 70-200mm f2.8 to 70-200mm f2.8 IS II worth it?



## Ayelike (Jun 26, 2012)

I'm just looking at the lenses I own and wondering if upgrading my 70-200mm f2.8 to the IS II version would be worth it. Now I've upgraded to the 5D3 I'm doing more low light work and I'm thinking the IS will be a bonus.

The test shots make the IS II look a little sharper and also it seems to work better with extenders. I just wondered if anybody on here had used both and what their thoughts were.

I think by the time I've sold my old one and bought a new one it'll cost me about £1,000. For that money I could extend my reach and options by getting a 7D or put the money towards a 300mm or 400mm.

Thoughts please?


----------



## Razor2012 (Jun 26, 2012)

I can just speak for the 70-200 2.8II and it's everything they say it is. Being fast and sharp with added IS makes this an awesome lens. I just shot a few hundred pics in low light and was extremely happy. Handheld the whole time using Av with auto ISO. Pictures looked great from 400 - 12800 and never used flash all night.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jun 26, 2012)

Simple answer: Yes.

If you have the funds, I wouldn't think twice about it. I had the v1 and after the v2 came out I asked some of my pro still photog friends that I shoot with if it was worth the upgrade and none of them hesitated in saying YES. It is a great lens on the 5DmkIII.


----------



## Ayelike (Jun 26, 2012)

Thanks very much for the feedback. My funds are still hurting a bit from the 5D3 purchase but I think this will be my next step - I was going to get a 16-35mm but I want to see where this 14-24mm talk is going...

Has anybody had much experience with the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II with the 2x Extender III? I think the combination is sharp enough for me but I'd like to know what people think of the AF speed - as it will be reduced. Can it still track motor sports etc even if it takes a little longer to get the initial lock on? I hear it's faster AF than the Extender II but I've not used either. I may rent before I buy but I'd like to hear your take on the subject.

Thanks for any replies
Neil


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 27, 2012)

The pix below was shot with 5D III + 70-200 f2.8 IS II. Handheld f2.8 1/60 ISO1000 at 200mm - school old gym, some nature light through high windows.

Can't speak for non IS version, but f2.8 IS II is *must have* lens in my bag. This is mid range lens for FF.


----------



## bigmag13 (Jun 27, 2012)

Ayelike said:


> I'm just looking at the lenses I own and wondering if upgrading my 70-200mm f2.8 to the IS II version would be worth it. Now I've upgraded to the 5D3 I'm doing more low light work and I'm thinking the IS will be a bonus.
> 
> The test shots make the IS II look a little sharper and also it seems to work better with extenders. I just wondered if anybody on here had used both and what their thoughts were.
> 
> ...



the V2!


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 27, 2012)

I'd vote yes! Buy it and send it to me!  This lens is definitely the next one on my list, unfortunately probably not going to happen for another 6+ months unless I get a major cash windfall *crosses fingers on lotto*


----------



## risc32 (Jun 27, 2012)

I also have the original non IS version of this lens. Every once and a while I think about upgrading to the v2 IS also, but ultimately so far I haven't. The IS would be nice as now I'm shooting some video work, and the closer focusing distance would be welcome(as it would in nearly every lens I own). It looks like the AF and IQ should be a touch better, but those aren't as important to me(only because I find mine current pretty awesome). I also figured I'd need to cough up another 1k for this swap, and after some thinking i decide against it. I could get a 135f2, or nearly a 85L(v1 used) for that $1k. Plus for me anyway if i need IS i'll just back up and use my 300mm. But still, every so often...


----------



## Razor2012 (Jun 27, 2012)

risc32 said:


> I also have the original non IS version of this lens. Every once and a while I think about upgrading to the v2 IS also, but ultimately so far I haven't. The IS would be nice as now I'm shooting some video work, and the closer focusing distance would be welcome(as it would in nearly every lens I own). It looks like the AF and IQ should be a touch better, but those aren't as important to me(only because I find mine current pretty awesome). I also figured I'd need to cough up another 1k for this swap, and after some thinking i decide against it. I could get a 135f2, or nearly a 85L(v1 used) for that $1k. Plus for me anyway if i need IS i'll just back up and use my 300mm. But still, every so often...



It's tough when you know a lens is out there that is that good.


----------



## Jettatore (Jun 27, 2012)

I can't speak for any of these lenses in detail, however size and weight may be some consideration along with price. With the strong low-light performance of your 5DIII you might consider the f/4 IS version.

It's listed at:
f/4 IS - 76 x 172mm 26.8 oz./760g (about same size but 55g heavier than the non-IS f/4 version)
f/2.8 non-IS (your current lens) 84.6mm x 193.6mm, 1310g (for comparison)
f/2.8 IS II 88.8 x 199mm; 52.6 oz./1490g (just slightly bigger and slightly heavier than the Mark I IS version)

f/4 IS would give you the IS functionality you are looking for, while losing you a stop of light, however you are getting a big upgrade on the size and weight vs. your current lens and as well vs. the other lens you are mainly considering. Price is a decent bit cheaper. While the size difference isn't enormous for most purposes that weight difference is nothing to laugh at, and unless there was a specific requirement for it (which I am sure there are many valid ones out there), I'd go for the lighter, cheaper setup.


----------



## Ayelike (Jun 27, 2012)

Wow! Some great example shots there - thanks for posting them. I can't believe the sharpness of that shot at 200mm handheld at 1/60th. Incredible.

Looks like my mind is made up. I'll throw my non-IS onto eBay soon and if it meets the reserve I'll do the upgrade.

Thanks for the unanimous decision... though I also appreciate the comment about the f/4 version. Although I know the IS is heavier than the non-IS, I've never really had a problem with the weight of any of my f2.8 lenses and I'm not sure I could be happy with a smaller aperture now I'm used to it. Definitely worth mentioning though so thanks for bringing it up.


----------



## Jettatore (Jun 27, 2012)

Ayelike,

I'm all for EBay and whatnot, but for a seller you will lose a decent bit between EBay and then likely Paypal on top of that. There is some safety included in selling that way but the combined percentages are quite high. I don't know what the current rates are but last I checked between the two of them combined it was well over 10% of your sale. Just a thought, you might want to consider an advert on something like DPReview gear for sale forums which is free and just don't send the item until the buyers payment clears. Best of luck selling and good luck getting a good deal on the f/2.8 IS II


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 28, 2012)

Ayelike said:


> Wow! Some great example shots there - thanks for posting them. I can't believe the sharpness of that shot at 200mm handheld at 1/60th. Incredible.
> 
> Looks like my mind is made up. I'll throw my non-IS onto eBay soon and if it meets the reserve I'll do the upgrade.
> 
> Thanks for the unanimous decision... though I also appreciate the comment about the f/4 version. Although I know the IS is heavier than the non-IS, I've never really had a problem with the weight of any of my f2.8 lenses and I'm not sure I could be happy with a smaller aperture now I'm used to it. Definitely worth mentioning though so thanks for bringing it up.



I bought a RS7 strap from BH. Big huge different compared to Canon neck strap - it reduces so *much* weight and it looks way better then the neck strap. I have no problem carry my 5D III + 70-200 f2.8 IS II for 4-5hrs with RS7. Give it a try 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/661579-REG/Black_Rapid_RS7_1BB_RS_7_Camera_Strap.html


----------



## Rockets95 (Jun 28, 2012)

Ayelike said:


> I'm just looking at the lenses I own and wondering if upgrading my 70-200mm f2.8 to the IS II version would be worth it. Now I've upgraded to the 5D3 I'm doing more low light work and I'm thinking the IS will be a bonus.
> 
> The test shots make the IS II look a little sharper and also it seems to work better with extenders. I just wondered if anybody on here had used both and what their thoughts were.
> 
> ...



IMHO, this is the sharpest Canon zoom now. It used to be the 70-200 f/4 IS, which I have also, but my wife has taken over.


----------



## risc32 (Jun 28, 2012)

I have no doubt you'll be pleased. happy shooting.


----------



## risc32 (Jun 28, 2012)

I have no doubt you'll be pleased. happy shootin


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 28, 2012)

Yes.

Sharper, Faster AF, and Improved IS. Its a worthwhile upgrade.


----------



## THX723 (Jun 29, 2012)

Ayelike said:


> Has anybody had much experience with the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II with the 2x Extender III? I think the combination is sharp enough for me but I'd like to know what people think of the AF speed - as it will be reduced. Can it still track motor sports etc even if it takes a little longer to get the initial lock on? I hear it's faster AF than the Extender II but I've not used either. I may rent before I buy but I'd like to hear your take on the subject.


I shoot motorsports with that very combo: 70-200 f2.8L II + 2x TC III. It is definitely up to the task. There is a perceptible drop in AF speed as well as IQ, but still very acceptable. The combined mass will get to you, if you plan on free-holding (w.o. monopod/tripod). The 100-400 is much better in that respect. However the 70-200/2x is far more versatile w. it's 70-200/140-400 dual role.


----------



## bkorcel (Jun 29, 2012)

MkII is definately worth it...but I feel the original non-IS model is just a "touch" sharper. The IS at 200mm or more with the extenders makes up for it though.

Really boils down to if you need the IS at all. Some people use tripods, have steady hands, cant afford the IS. I would not get one with the Mark I IS. They are soft all over the place and was a mistake to release as an L lens. Original and MKII versions were much better.

If you already own the non-IS version, you will get a pretty good trade in for it depending on condition...which was what I did.


----------



## drjlo (Jun 29, 2012)

bkorcel said:


> The IS at 200mm or more with the extenders makes up for it though.



Shooting at 400mm (with 2X TC III) hand-held is greatly helped by the excellent IS on the 70-200 f/2.8 II. Carrying a tripod is often talked about but seldom done IME.




DZ3C4750 by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------

