Best lens I ever had

Started 4 months ago | User reviews
Edward Leiken Forum Member • Posts: 71
Best lens I ever had
4

Yeah, this and the 28-70 2.8L are perfect.  Best lenses EVER, IMHO.  I got them with an Elan IIe back around '97.   They were great with the EOS 3, the 10D, the 7D, and now with the R5... wow!  So much unused potential.  I never knew!  This lense with the adapter is SO sharp, and focuses faster than I could have imagined before.   It's heavy.  So am I though.  I love this lens.

-- hide signature --

Dyslexics are teople poo.

 Edward Leiken's gear list:Edward Leiken's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM +1 more
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
Telephoto zoom lens • Canon EF • 2569A004
Edward Leiken's score
5.0
Average community score
5.0
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon EOS 10D Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS R5
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
gaul Senior Member • Posts: 1,131
EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?

EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far is it from IS versions in IQ terms?

  • Is it similar in IQ to v1 IS?
  • But clearly behind v2 IS and v3 IS?
1Dx4me
1Dx4me Forum Pro • Posts: 11,166
Re: Best lens I ever had
1

i have had this lens for a long time and enjoyed using it. it produces sharp photos and color and micro contrast is superb. in fact, i have heard it was better than the IS version at the time. i don't think it would be too far behind the v.2/v.3, though.

as you suggested, it is a bit too heavy, probably the same as my canon 100400 II. i rather have the f4.0 IS for travel than the f2.8, though.

-- hide signature --

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!

Lemming51
Lemming51 Forum Pro • Posts: 15,225
Re: Best lens I ever had
2

+1

Edward Leiken wrote:

... I got them with an Elan IIe back around '97.

Doppelgänger! Though I got my Elan IIe and 70-200/2.8L a little earlier.

... So much unused potential. I never knew! This lens ... is SO sharp, and focuses faster than I could have imagined before. It's heavy. ... I love this lens.

Ditto Ditto Ditto. Ditto.

Awesome bokeh, too. But the heavy part. The weight didn't bother me at all in my younger days, but in my dotage I find myself using the lightweight EF 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS STM more often. But for portraits, oooh I pull out the big ole 2.8L.

-- hide signature --

Unapologetic Canon Apologist

 Lemming51's gear list:Lemming51's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +5 more
OP Edward Leiken Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: Best lens I ever had

Lemming51 wrote:

I love that shot. She's looking at you with the left eye but the right iris and lower lid are so sharp that it draws you over there. That, contrasting with the puffiness, it's just great.

-- hide signature --

Dyslexics are teople poo.

 Edward Leiken's gear list:Edward Leiken's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM +1 more
Rock and Rollei Senior Member • Posts: 2,307
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?
2

gaul wrote:

EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far is it from IS versions in IQ terms?

  • Is it similar in IQ to v1 IS?
  • But clearly behind v2 IS and v3 IS?

Does it actually matter? Will it make a real-world difference in the way you use your pictures in real life?

I've got the f2.8 IS II. I also have an old Sigma EX HSM f2.8 70-200. The Sigma is, from memory, a very similar performer to this version of the L lens except wide open, where it lags a touch. Was still fine for weddings back in the day. It's now an emergency backup lens - I had loaned it out to a friend in the hope he would buy it, but somehow it found its way back. Now I'm sure if I shot side by side and pixel peeped, I would tell the difference. But the Sigma still produces entirely usable pictures for real life usage, prints or Web use, for example. If I had had this Canon, I don't think i would have bothered upgrading it, because I only upgraded the Sigma for f2.8 performance.

Ultimate IQ isn't necessary in most cases. Good enough is, and I think that for almost all uses, this lens is more than good enough.

As ever, YMMV.

 Rock and Rollei's gear list:Rock and Rollei's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM +29 more
gipper51 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,203
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?
1

gaul wrote:

EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far is it from IS versions in IQ terms?

  • Is it similar in IQ to v1 IS?
  • But clearly behind v2 IS and v3 IS?

Better than the IS v1 (especially at 200mm), and only slightly behind the IS II and III.  This lens is still good enough to produce excellent results on every Canon body ever made.  Lack of IS and weather sealing are the only things you can knock this lens for.  I anxiously await putting this lens on a R body with IS at some point.  Shame though, the R5/R6 don't shoot at their full 12fps on the mechanical shutter with this lens

-- hide signature --
 gipper51's gear list:gipper51's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM +14 more
gaul Senior Member • Posts: 1,131
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?

gipper51 wrote:

gaul wrote:

EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far is it from IS versions in IQ terms?

  • Is it similar in IQ to v1 IS?
  • But clearly behind v2 IS and v3 IS?

Better than the IS v1 (especially at 200mm), and only slightly behind the IS II and III. This lens is still good enough to produce excellent results on every Canon body ever made. Lack of IS and weather sealing are the only things you can knock this lens for. I anxiously await putting this lens on a R body with IS at some point. Shame though, the R5/R6 don't shoot at their full 12fps on the mechanical shutter with this lens

Thx for the reply

So the non-IS lens still has a lot to go for

Cheap compared to the IS ones, robust (no IS to break)

Slightly less IQ than Mk II and Mk iii and lack of weather-sealing being the main drawbacks

OP Edward Leiken Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?
1

gaul wrote:

Slightly less IQ than Mk II and Mk iii and lack of weather-sealing being the main drawbacks

Forgive me, but I thought there WAS weather-sealing.  In fact that was one of the reasons I bought it.  So far so good for me, and I've been maybe a little hard on it.

-- hide signature --

Dyslexics are teople poo.

 Edward Leiken's gear list:Edward Leiken's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM +1 more
Dashed Junior Member • Posts: 30
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?

Edward Leiken wrote:

Dyslexics are teople poo.

Are we still doing dyslexia shaming? I thought that was so 1970’s and society had become better than that ☹️☹️

OP Edward Leiken Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?

No way.  We do it in the 20's as well!  And better!

-- hide signature --

Dyslexics are teople poo.

 Edward Leiken's gear list:Edward Leiken's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM +1 more
ffabrici Senior Member • Posts: 1,147
Re: EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far from IS versions?

gipper51 wrote:

gaul wrote:

EF 70-200 F/2.8 non IS .. How far is it from IS versions in IQ terms?

  • Is it similar in IQ to v1 IS?
  • But clearly behind v2 IS and v3 IS?

Better than the IS v1 (especially at 200mm), and only slightly behind the IS II and III. This lens is still good enough to produce excellent results on every Canon body ever made. Lack of IS and weather sealing are the only things you can knock this lens for. I anxiously await putting this lens on a R body with IS at some point. Shame though, the R5/R6 don't shoot at their full 12fps on the mechanical shutter with this lens

I fully agree with your conclusions, gipper51. I bought this lens over the IS V1 because of it’s better sharpness and contrast which is very visible at 200mm.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads