Canon 70-200mm L must buy lens?

[Kho King]

Is the Canon 70-200mm L a must buy lens in Canon EF series? Not talking about the IS version (too expensive...a tripod is better for me).

Is there any unsatisfied owner of the Canon 70-200mm L here?

[AReality]

Originally Posted by Kho King Is there any unsatisfied owner of the Canon 70-200mm L here?

Yah...
The 70-200 F2.8 too heavy.

[clive]

caution!!! once u touch it, u wil b a hopeless L addict 4 the rest of ur life!!!

which means...get it if u can!!!

[mylau]

Originally Posted by Kho King Is the Canon 70-200mm L a must buy lens in Canon EF series? Not talking about the IS version (too expensive...a tripod is better for me). Is there any unsatisfied owner of the Canon 70-200mm L here?

my experience with this lens is that it is very good for shooting indoor sports from the sidelines. f2.8 and iso 1600 can capture a lot of sports action.

another way which i use this lens is shooting portraits of brides during their wedding day. very good bokeh.

very satistied owner here.

if u r on a tight budget, the sigma 70-200 EX is a very good substitute.

[sehsuan]

Originally Posted by AReality Yah... The 70-200 F2.8 too heavy.

wah... bought already?

mylau basically summed it all up, but for shooting sports, there may be a preference for a longer still lens...

[jeff49er]

I just got the 77-200 f4 L

Lighter than the f2.8 model and plus the eos 33, weight is just nice

[jeff49er]

I just got my 70-200 f4 l

Though it is not in the same league as the f2.8, it is lighter and feels good with my eos 33

[lauLEE]

Canon 70-200mm L must buy lens?

If you are a casual photog, then it's not neccessary to have any L lens, including this 70-200mm, and esp the IS version.
But if you are serious abt your quality and scope, then the 70-200 L is a must, especially the IS version.

Dream lens:-
A) 16-35mm or 17-40mm L
B) 24-70mm L
C) 70-200mm L IS
D) 300mm f2.8 + 1.4x or 2x TC

[AReality]

Originally Posted by sehsuan wah... bought already? mylau basically summed it all up, but for shooting sports, there may be a preference for a longer still lens...

Haha.. no lar... no $$.
In my dreams only...

[erwinx]

I would find handholding a 70-200 without IS very difficult, but then, i'm just a weekend shooter so i would choose the 70-200 f/4 for its lighter weight over 70-200 f/2.8.

For 'static' indoor event/wedding shots, its always nice to have 2-3 stops of hand-holding speed which can translate to lower ISO and/or smaller aperture.

[sequitur]

yeah

coming from a consumer DC.. the f4 is really freaking heavy when used with a 10D already.. -_-

i think with 2.8 IS = neckbreak/wrist pain

[Kho King]

I am a fan of fast lens. I have not used the 70-200mm f4 before (nor the Canon f2.8), how does the bokeh compare to the f2.8? New f4 is around S$1.3k? I am a Nikonian, I like the Nikon 80-200mm when shooting at f2.8 for portrait. Good bokeh to make the subject stands out!

For me...I find handholding a 70-200mm zoom is a pain, especially at the longer focal length, regardless of aperture speed. My thought of using this zoom is for portrait mainly, and I don't think I can shoot portrait at very high shutter speed (not going to ask the model to stand below sun), thus might be on tripod or monopod most of the time. So...weight might not be a big issue (I hope so...)

What's the different in weight? I know the f2.8 is 1.3kg (IS version is 1.46kg).

[MaGixShOe]

If u are going to shoot portrait then get the 85mm f1.8. Its lighter(can handheld without handshake, not so tired), cheaper, sharper, smaller and blah blah blah....

[ckiang]

Originally Posted by Kho King I am a fan of fast lens. I have not used the 70-200mm f4 before (nor the Canon f2.8), how does the bokeh compare to the f2.8? New f4 is around S$1.3k? I am a Nikonian, I like the Nikon 80-200mm when shooting at f2.8 for portrait. Good bokeh to make the subject stands out! For me...I find handholding a 70-200mm zoom is a pain, especially at the longer focal length, regardless of aperture speed. My thought of using this zoom is for portrait mainly, and I don't think I can shoot portrait at very high shutter speed (not going to ask the model to stand below sun), thus might be on tripod or monopod most of the time. So...weight might not be a big issue (I hope so...) What's the different in weight? I know the f2.8 is 1.3kg (IS version is 1.46kg).

Hmm... a bit OT, but why ask about the 70-200L which you cannot use?

Regards
CK

[Terence]

The 70-200L was one of the lenses I checked out before finally purchasing the 100-400L as my telephoto (mainly becos of the extra focal length and IS).

I'd agree with most on the weight issue but it's a matter of getting used to it. The 100-400L is similar in weight and I travel extensively with it. Can be a problem at times but the results are well worth the weight.

Originally Posted by lauLEE Canon 70-200mm L must buy lens? If you are a casual photog, then it's not neccessary to have any L lens, including this 70-200mm, and esp the IS version. But if you are serious abt your quality and scope, then the 70-200 L is a must, especially the IS version. Dream lens:- A) 16-35mm or 17-40mm L B) 24-70mm L C) 70-200mm L IS D) 300mm f2.8 + 1.4x or 2x TC

Hi.
Your dream lens is 70-200mm L IS
I do got one of this lens. Used is abt 3 mths
Do u want to buy it?
What is your dream price for this

[vince]

Originally Posted by Kho King Is the Canon 70-200mm L a must buy lens in Canon EF series? Not talking about the IS version (too expensive...a tripod is better for me). Is there any unsatisfied owner of the Canon 70-200mm L here?

To say that a lens is a "must buy" is up to the photographer to decide. However, a decent telephoto is recommended if you intend to shoot sports/action, street, wildlife or even sometimes portrait photography. It's entirely up to you to decide what lens should be purchased. Of course, you don't have to go for the L lens (which stands for "Luxury" and therefore not a necessity).

I'd put it as a "recommended to have" lens rather than a "required to have" lens. Afterall, there are other (and probably cheaper) alternatives to this lens (which by the way is a fantastic lens to have).

[vince]

Originally Posted by lauLEE Dream lens:- A) 16-35mm or 17-40mm L B) 24-70mm L C) 70-200mm L IS D) 300mm f2.8 + 1.4x or 2x TC

Dream lenses for me:-

A) 14mm f/2.8 L USM
B) TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L
C) TS-E 45mm f/2.8

[Kho King]

Originally Posted by ckiang Hmm... a bit OT, but why ask about the 70-200L which you cannot use? Regards CK

CK...I just bought a Canon body...

[Kho King]

Originally Posted by Terence The 70-200L was one of the lenses I checked out before finally purchasing the 100-400L as my telephoto (mainly becos of the extra focal length and IS). I'd agree with most on the weight issue but it's a matter of getting used to it. The 100-400L is similar in weight and I travel extensively with it. Can be a problem at times but the results are well worth the weight.

I have played with a 100-400L before, IS really works (but I don't like the push pull design)! Too bad I don't have $$$ to burn during that time (3 months ago), else I would have grabbed it from the seller (cheap...)