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

[Richard Lane]

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

[saturnia]

Rich,


I know. Indoors in low light & 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

[Trowski]

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








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








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








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








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>

[saturnia]

Look really great. Amazing that most of those action pics were well focused! This clearly beats my 70-200/4 IS, so far one of my best AF tele performers in combo with my 7D.

[neuroanatomist]

Amazing that most of those action pics were well focused!

Yes, AF on the 70-200 II is excellent. But part of that is the 7D itself. Here's a burst sequence I shot with an excellent Canon lens, but one that's referred to as 'slow focusing' and 'not well-suited for action shooting'...the EF 85mm f1.2<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II. The short sequence below is my daughter running towards me along a garden path, and over that distance the 7D in AI-Servo AF with the 85L kept focus on her eyes at 8 fps andat f/1.2,despite the extremely thin DoF!! You can't tell from these small shots, in the full size shots I can distinguish individual eyelashes in every shot. The shots only went out of focus as she ran closer than the MFD of the lens.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/6354.Garden-Run.JPG[/img]

[Steven23]

Wish i had the money to get one, or a loan to buy it and slowly pay it off. I

[Richard Lane]

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 [img]/emoticons/emotion-11.gif[/img]. 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

You have quite a collection of nice long lenses there! I guess, it's really going to come down to what your "needs" or "wants" are? You seem to have all of the desirable focal lengths covered, so we need to decide what kind of speed you require for the type of shooting that you'll be doing. As you know the f/2.8 is great for action shots, lower lighting, and better bokeh. The f/2.8 is also heavier and a lot more expensive. The f/2.8 also lets in twice as much light as the f/4 does, therefore it focuses faster at all of the apertures, not just at f/2.8, since the AF speed is dependent on the light entering the camera. This feature will also give you a brighter view-finder and it will give you a little more leeway when it comes to adding extenders, because it will save you a full stop.<span style="font-size: x-small;"]<span style="font-size: 11.8056px;"]Furthermore, the MK II Version adds sharpness to the equation.


<span style="font-size: x-small;"]<span style="font-size: 11.8056px;"]I also have the 300mm f/2.8L IS, so I could show you a few of those on the 7D, but then I think you'll buy it. This is my longest lens, as of this typing (no expressed guarantees are intended)! I frequently use the 1.4X on it, with great results. The 300mm is really a speciality lens, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II with or without 1.4X extender has a lot more uses. The 300mm f/2.8 is a little heavy and conspicuous for walking around, not that any of the white lenses are stealth, but you could buy a black cover. If you get the 70-200mm II, then you could possibly add the 1.4x extender and do sniper zooming! You just put the 1.4x in your pocket and then lock and load. You may be able to sell your 300 f/4 too?


<span style="font-size: 11.8056px;"]As far as the 5D goes it's a great body; FF, low light, low noise, slower AF, landscapes, wider focal lengths, good for still shots. However, you sound more like a 7D guy to me! As you could see, the 7D does beautiful portraits too.


<span style="font-size: 11.8056px;"]Ok, so.., convince me why you need a 300mm f/2.8. []Go ahead.., it will be good practice, for when you tell your Wife.


<span style="font-size: 11.8056px;"]Rich

[saturnia]

Rich,


As I live in Europe (Frankfurt, Germany) I reply with a good sleep's delay but I must be brief this morning. Have to work and make the Euros I need for such an expensive hobby []. I'll think about your post today and try to reply more detailed this evening. But you are certainly correct, I am more a 7D than a 5D guy because I do more tele action and macro shooting. Here's a collection of links that tell a story about my photographic skills (landscape is something that I want to learn better in future, but over all I am an action guy).


If you are curious, here some of my tele photos (with technical data, you can enlarge them by clicking on them):


http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/370466/our-world-can-be-soo-beautiful?inalbum=faces


http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/361627/call-me-a-beauty-not-a-beast?inalbum=faces


http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/361631/northern-gannet-formation-flight?inalbum=birds


http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/330524/singing-in-the-reed_eurasian-reed-warbler?inalbum=birds


http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/384389/yawning-is-universal


here a macro (do not have much online but made many):


http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6385346624/photos/373028/8-eyes-watching-you?inalbum=macros-sort-of


here a low light indoors 50 mm social shot:


http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/Entry.aspx?ID=269393


(this made only #88 in a dpreview challenge but as I draw a lot of portraits of people in my sketchbooks I do love this pic very much).


Roland

[saturnia]

The 300mm f/2.8 is a little heavy and conspicuous for walking around, not that any of the white lenses are stealth, but you could buy a black cover.

That's true. I covered my 400/5.6 with a camouflage wrapping since I observed that this long white thing scares in particular wild birds. I meet sometimes those guys with the really fat lenses such as EF 600/4 and noticed that they all "stealthed" their portable astrononical observation instruments []. In fact, those lenses are certainly fantastic for wildlife shooting but too big for me. I prefer lenses that I still could hold in my hand if needed. So the 300/2.8 would be on the heaviest possible side for me (besides the price of a 600/4 [:S], that's then really out of proportion for my purposes).

Ok, so.., convince me why you need a 300mm f/2.8. [img]/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]Go ahead.., it will be good practice, for when you tell your Wife.

Yeah, that's the right question. When we hike somewhere in the wilderness, with full backpack gear, the best solution then would be the 300/2.8. As I am also used to primes I do not really miss the versatility of, say, a 100-400 zoom. If I can't frame the full bird or so I go for a detail loaded portrait and am more happy with that if it's sharp.


On other occasions, sniping around in the streets on festivals, visiting a zoo or doing outdoors/ indoors social shoots, the EF 70-200/2.8 (+ a good 1.4x extender) is clearly the better choice.


If I check the numbers of pictures I shoot in both types of situations, the balance goes slightly towards the 300/2.8 and birding...


So I have to think about that.


My wife's much more addicted to photography then me (and shoots other than me on a real pro level), so she'd smile... unfortunatele she's a Nikonian so we couldn't share very expensive lenses (and we do avoid the argument who is allowed to use it now).


So, thanks, Rich. Maybe you could post sometimes some shots with the 300/2.8 + 7D combo. I'd be in particular interested how that works with a 1.4 extender. I have a Kenko 300plus, quite sharp, not much distortion, but may have to change to a more exensive Canon extender then.

[Richard Lane]

So, thanks, Rich. Maybe you could post sometimes some shots with the 300/2.8 + 7D combo. I'd be in particular interested how that works with a 1.4 extender. I have a Kenko 300plus, quite sharp, not much distortion, but may have to change to a more exensive Canon extender then.

Hey Roland,


Sorry about the delay!


EOS 7D: 300mm f/2.8L IS. Circ. Pol., Monopod, Very Mild PP


The 420mm shots are with the 1.4X Canon Extender II.





@300mm, f/2.8, 1/2000sec. ISO 100, uncropped









@300mm, f/2.8, 1/2000sec, ISO 100, uncropped









@300mm, f/2.8, 1/2500sec, -0.33 ev, ISO 100, uncropped








@300mm, f/2.8, 1/1600sec, ISO 100, uncropped









@300mm, f/2.8, 1/1000sec, ISO 100, uncropped









@300mm, f/3.2, 1/1000sec, ISO 100, uncropped









@420mm, f/4, 1/1600sec, ISO 100, uncropped






@420mm, f/4.5, 1/1250sec, ISO 160, mild crop









@420mm, f/4, 1/1000sec, ISO 100, mild crop









@420mm, f/4, 1/1000sec, ISO 100, uncropped






The End!


I Hope You Like!


C&amp;C Welcome!


Rich