Your experience with the new EF 70-200/2.8 L IS USM II

This is addressed to all that use an EF 70-200/2.8 II: I'd appreciate to read some posts about your experience with it - in particular of those who use it with a crop cam. I have a 7D and a 50D as backup (I prefer crop cams for tele shooting). According to many reviews I read (e.g. on dpreview.com) the older Mark I version wasn't too sharp in its sweet spot so it was not the best solution for an APS sensor - much better for a full frame. So I invested in Tamron's much cheaper alternative. With the Mark II version things obviously have completely changed according to reviews that stress lab tests. Should do much better. Bryan writes in his review that this is now his favorite and most-used lens (but he prefers full frame bodys I understand).


Currently I use two lenses in that zoom range:


EF 70-200/4 L IS USM: superb sharp lens with very quick and accurate AF drive, light. This is my standard lens in particular for medium distance action shooting (birds, sports etc.). But as it is not very fast it is only an outdoor lens.


Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di Macro Lens: I was lucky to get a copy that with well adjusted lenses so I didn't have the trouble that Bryan reports in his review of this lens. It needed an AF microadjustment with both my 7D and 50D, of course. It is tack sharp (sharpness brakes only down in the medium zoom range a bit), fast, and it provides with 0.90 m minimum distance a quite good macro potential (another drawback of Canon's Mark I f/2.8). It is a superb portrait lens, too, and its bokeh does not meet Canon's L quality but is okay. The major drawbacks are that it has no IS (I miss that in particular when I do macro), and it's noisy micro motor drive is so imprecise that it mostly comes down to manual focusing - with f/2.8 and short depth-of-field a gamble (even with a good viewfinder as the 7D has). The latter started to really annoy me and I realized that I stopped using this lens very often. So the Tamron is a solid lens, but completely old school and does not meet today's level of photo shooting. I really think about starting to save many of my Cents to replace it by Canon's 70-200/II.


If you are lucky, you can get good results with the Tamron but you always need to shoot say 4-5 times to get a sharp pic (f/2.8, 1/125 s, 83.0 mm, cropped, shot with EOS 50D indoors):


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/3162.Bonobo_5F00_MG_5F00_9136-crop-low-res.JPG[/img]


Thanks in advance to all for your comments.


Roland

Hey Roland,


This is my most versatile, favorite Lens. The pictures are stellar; fast and sharp when you need it, and soft when you want it. These are from my friends Wedding this past Labor Day Weekend. I was not the hired Photographer, but I was a guest and took some shots asafavor to my very good friend. I hope the hiredphotographerwas on his game, beacuse he was using a basic Nikon 1.6X body (model?) and a 16-135mm f/3.5-5.6 DX zoom lens, because she was thrilled with these, but I know he was not getting the beautiful bokeh that I was at f/2.8, He was a little under gunned, but very nice guy though! I think he was a little jealous, when he saw some of the results that I was getting with my EF-85mm f/1.2L II as well.


All shots were taken with a 7D and EF-70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.


@ 140mm, f/2.8, 1/200sec, ISO 125


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/...7b0d4795_b.jpg





@115mm, f/2.8, 1/200sec, ISO 100


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4086/...6dfa001f_b.jpg





@ 200mm, f/3.5, 1/320sec, ISO 400


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4104/...58d3b38f_b.jpg


Ok..., you all know that I'm a Sports Shooter, but I do have a softer side, so,.., lets just keep this between us, beacause I wouldn't want to get laughed off the field.


Rich

Rich,


Good advice and nice shots. Curious though as why no fill flash was used on B&G?


Tom

Hi Rich,


Thanks for the quick, great and absolutely convincing comment. Your pics look very nice. In particular I love the one with the young lady - not only because she is so beautiful but because of the right moment you catched so precisely. That's exactly the trouble with my Tamron 70-200/2.8 and its flawed AF drive - nearly no chance with that short DoF and manual focusing to make such a hit.


And yep, that's an L bokeh, my Tamron never meets that. I know such bokehs from the other L lenses I have in my collection.


Your shots convince me that the new 70-200/2.8 obviously makes a very good combo with the 7D. With its AF performance I have quite a mixed experience depending on the lens I use. In short, new Canon lenses like the EF 100/2.8 II macro perform really superbly with the 7D, older lenses, even L ones, tend to make somtimes trouble even after AF microadjustment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Lane

he was using a basic Nikon 1.6X body (model?) and a 16-135mm f/3.5-5.6 DX zoom lens

---

can imagine... maybe he now starts saving bucks for the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 II which is said to be very good as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Lane

Ok..., you all know that I'm a Sports Shooter, but I do have a softer side, so,.., lets just keep this between us, beacause I wouldn't want to get laughed off the field.

---

Don't worry: (1) I am located in Germany, (2) the only pros I know are not in the sports business [;)]


Roland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Wertman

Rich,


Good advice and nice shots. Curious though as why no fill flash was used on B&G?


Tom
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

Good question, you're absolutely right I should of used some low powered fill flash. I didn't, because the photographer was firing off shots too, with an assistant holding a reflector and I was trying to stay out of the way.I quess I could of snuck in a quick one with the 7D pop up flash and I didn't bring the 580 EXII though, because I didn't want to interfere with his shots and I thought I had low light covered with the 85mm f/1.2LII. Ah..., but who knew that the garden would have all of those lovely trees with the sun poking through.


Rich

Hi Roland,


It's a great lens. Period.


My only gripe, if you can call it that, is the focal length - for me, it's too long for use in the house, and too short for wildlife/birds. Since you already have two 70-200mm lenses, you clearly know what you want to do with that focal length.


AF performance, sharpness, color and contrast, all excellent.


It does great in low light - although you wouldn't know it from the relatively bright image below, this shot was taken in my yard, about 30 minutes after sunset. This is before I shot everything RAW, so it's a jpg straight from the camera. The 100% crop shows good detail (including part of our house and some trees reflected in the eye). The shutter speed of 1/30 s at 200mm is a testament to the performance of the IS system.



[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Components-UserFiles/00-00-00-35-15/IMG_5F00_3079.jpg[/img] [img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/3122.IMG_5F00_3079crop.jpg[/img]
EOS 7D, EF 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II IS USM @ 200mm, 1/30 s, f/2.8, ISO 1600


Here's one from a family outing to a local science museum, where this majestic fellow was being cared for after being shot in the wing. [8o|] The 'jittery' background bokeh is actually the wire mesh of the enclosure; the mesh in the foreground is effectively blurred out by the f/2.8 aperture.



[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_brain/4844142176/in/set-72157624462563459/lightbox/]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/...c27102f9_b.jpg[/url]
EOS 7D, EF 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II IS USM @ 200mm, 1/250 s, f/2.8, ISO 200


In short, it really is an excellent lens!


I do shoot in the rain occasionally, and the 70-200 II with a 1.4x extender gives me out to 280mm with the weather-sealing that my 100-400mm lacks (one reason I'm considering the new 70-300mm L). Here's a shot from a dim, drizzly morning with the extender. Even though that slows down AF speed (by Canon's design), AF is remarkably fast and accurate.


[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_brain/4844161720/in/set-72157624462563459/lightbox/]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4147/...b18e008e_b.jpg[/url]
EOS 7D, EF 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II IS USM + EF 1.4x II Extender @ 280mm, 1/2000 s, f/6.3, ISO 3200

Roland,


As Neuro stated, this lens is a little too long for indoors and the aperture is not wide enough for low light indoors, however if you sell your 70-200mm f/4 and your Tamron, then the 70-200mm is a very worthwhile upgrade for outdoors sports use and portraits, as well as many other uses. It

Hi John,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

It's a great lens. Period.


AF performance, sharpness, color and contrast, all excellent.

---

Yep, looks like... love in particular the white-tailed eagle. I know this typical jitter texture of fence's grids from zoo shootings... sometimes I love this strange effect, indeed. Reminds me to the ductus of a certain painting technique when you produce a background layer with strong crossed brush strokes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

My only gripe, if you can call it that, is the focal length - for me, it's too long for use in the house, and too short for wildlife/birds. Since you already have two 70-200mm lenses, you clearly know what you want to do with that focal length.

---

Yes I know this focal length very well, and you are quite right. But it depends, I was already in situations when my 400 mm was too long for shooting wild and big (sea) birds... I also love to use a 70-200 for portrait and social shots. Rich showed this lens' potential in this field with a real pro perfection.


Thanks again, Roland
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Rich,


I know. Indoors in low light &amp; social shooting I prefer my EF 50/1.4, I already stopped using very often my 17-55/2.8 for that purpose as it is still not fast enough (I love to work with available light even the 7D restricts that because of its noise level @ ISO 3200 and higher). Your EF 85/1.2 II certainly would be another fantastic lens for that purpose but I have already an extended gear for an amateur I think. For little birds I use mostly my 400/5.6, sometimes my 300/4, both extend the 70-200's range. The 300/4 I love to use for portraits in street carneval or so, it is a great lens for that sort of sniping [H]. The only thing I need basically to decide is whether I invest my hobby budget of the half year partly into the 70-200/2.8 plus an EOS 5D or completely into a 300/2.8... phew, that's a difficult decision for me.


Roland

Here's a few pictures I took a couple weeks ago with my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on my 7D.
<div>


200mm - 1/1000 @ f/2.8 ISO 125


http://trowski.com/files/pictures/IMG_1147.jpg





200mm - 1/1000 @ f/2.8 ISO 160


http://trowski.com/files/pictures/IMG_1148.jpg





200mm - 1/1000 @ f/2.8 ISO 200


http://trowski.com/files/pictures/IMG_1162.jpg





70mm - 1/640 @ f/4 ISO 800


http://trowski.com/files/pictures/IMG_1210.jpg





All of the pictures above except the last were cropped from the original down to only about 1/3rd to 1/4th of the original frame. I think this really shows how much detail you get from this lens! I took quite a few shots that day since I assumed many would be OOF, but nearly every one was perfect. I've been very impressed with the AF of this lens, particularly when tracking. It's probably the fastest and most accurate focusing lens I own. I had a hard time justifying the price of this lens before I got it, but after using it I have no regrets. Start saving your pennies - I'm sure you won't regret it either!
</div>