#1,677 in Electronics
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product
Reddit mentions of Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras
Sentiment score: 13
Reddit mentions: 21
We found 21 Reddit mentions of Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras. Here are the top ones.
or
- 70-200 mm focal length and 1:2.8 maximum aperture
- Lens construction consists of 23 elements in 19 groups (1 fluorite and 5 UD elements)
- 34-Degree - 12-Degree diagonal angle of view
- Inner focusing system with USM and full-time manual focus option
- 77 mm filter size. Extenders Compatible
Features:
Specs:
| Color | White |
| Height | 3.50393 Inches |
| Length | 7.83463 Inches |
| Number of items | 1 |
| Release date | January 2010 |
| Size | 1 |
| Weight | 2.9 Pounds |
| Width | 3.50393 Inches |
Yeah, photography as a hobby is up there with car collecting in how expensive it is. Bit off topic, but if you want to blow your mind, go look at some of the [telephoto lenses] (https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW/ref=sr_1_16?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1499099933&sr=1-16&keywords=canon+EF+telephoto) or for stuff even photographers think is a bit much, basically any [Hasselblad] (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1260272-REG/hasselblad_h_3013901_x1d_50c_medium_format_mirrorless.html).
As someone who moved from a 5DMk2 to a Sony A7rii (ducks!), perhaps I can shine some light (so to speak).
The lens adapters that you can buy which'll allow you use Canon lenses on a Sony body work within limitations. e.g. My Canon 70-200 f2.8 Mk2 focuses well up to 135mm focal lengths, but was confused with the metabones adapter I got for longer focal lengths. The Canon 24-70 f2.8 focused throughout the zoom range.
That said, native Sony lenses always were always more snappier and responsive than going through an adapter. That's no surprise, however, what did surprise me is how f'ing expensive Sony glass was compared to the equivalent Canon glass. You'll be paying a pretty high premium.
Sony Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS Lens is $2,598 US
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is $1,899 US
In hindsight, I still love the Sony sensor that came with the a7rii (incredible dynamic range and color) and the compact body, but I do miss the choice of Canon lenses.
Just my 2 cents.
The lens is canon 70-200mm F/2.8L (can't tell if it's 2nd gen or first). First generation is a little cheaper (1.5k) but the latest one is close to $2.5K. It's one of my dream lens but I already got similar one with F/4.
The Sigma 18-35 ART is one of the best zooms in it's focal range. The Tamron on the other-hand, is not... there's a huge difference in quality between it and this lens. It's still a very good tool but you might be in a situation where you have to sell again if you wish to upgrade.
If you want the best, get the Sigma and offload your 17-50.
You're going to have to give a budget. Budget friendly means different things to a lot of different people.
I'd certainly recommend the EF 24-70 f/2.8L USM II and the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM II.
If you're looking for more reach, I personally like the 200-400 f/4L IS USM with built-in 1.4x extender but you better hurry, there's only 5 left in stock.
> Also I can't buy secondhand stuff because .,., reasons.
Not really a reason.
The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II is $1799. If you want that focal length so bad, that's the route you need to go with the very capable camera you already have. It will perform just fine; it definitely isn't "way worse" than the Sony equivalent.
Echoing /u/shipshaper88 - why split yourself between two different camera systems? If you're looking to jump ship, then by all means, jump ship. However, it'd be wiser in that case to just sell your Canon gear outright.
I own a Canon 6D and mostly do astrophotography, portraits, and street photos. I have a ceremony coming up and thought that maybe it's about time to buy a good telephoto lens. My budget is up to $2000. I currently own the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8. Every website I read suggests only Canon lens, but I was wondering if there were any other telephoto lens from other companies that you guys would suggest.
If not, I might just go with one of these two:
https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1497036583&sr=8-4&keywords=Canon+EF+70-200mm+f%2F2.8
https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-Lens-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000I1X3W8/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1497036569&sr=8-4&keywords=Canon+EF+70-200mm+f%2F4L
Wondering how much of a problem the weight would be for the f/2.8 version.
70-200 F2.8L IS II - I can't afford it yet but every time I've used one or seen the images they've produced I've been amazed.
I'm like you. I have things that I want to buy in the future. The most expensive is a [70-200mm lens] (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1W26AZXHPCWRO&coliid=I3NPT8GSX9UZTS)for my 60D so i can take better pictures on the race track and it's an all around good lens. I do need a new laptop since mine is falling apart so I won't be buying the lens soon.
I've been going to these for a few years now, mostly just to see the randomness and watch the spectacle. There are some occasional good deals both for flipping or keeping, but the vast majority is junk. I've seen some items sell on Ebay for $400-500 that sold for $20 because they were obscure enough that no one bothered to google. The previous auction someone spent $2,700 on four different camera lenses and immediately put them on Craigslist. One of the lenses was this, brand new in box, it sold for $700. https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW He most likely profited around $2,200-$3,000 in just a few days after posting on Craigslist.
The downside is you're going against the same flippers who buy out 80% of the auction. Jewelry and coins go to the same three guys. More expensive bikes go to the same three guys, etc. Then there's so much over paying it's hilarious. Enough that it makes you wonder if people are actually laundering money through the police. I watched someone pay $5,500 for ten older Iphones that retailed for $500 each brand new.
You don't actually get to see the content of the cardboard boxes when the actual bidding takes place either. So every auction there are people who will take a desired item and place them in a different cardboard box in the final moments before everyone is forced away from looking. For example, at the last auction they auctioned six boxes, in a choice bid, meaning the winner chooses whichever box he wants out of the six. The bid went for $120-180 because the winner wanted the box that had a new pair of Beats by Dre. As he goes to pay, someone else requests another choice bid out of the remaining five boxes, which he wins with a bid at like $40. The first guy after paying, grabs his box and finds that the Beats aren't inside. Instead, there was just the outer sleeve the Beats packaging came in. The person who requested the second bid? Miraculously, the Beats were inside the box he chose. No refunds either, so the first guy got screwed. I've witnessed this happen multiple times.
MFT lenses aren't always more expensive - equivalent MFT lenses often cost about the same as or less than Canon full frame glass. Here are a couple of examples:
At the low end, a Canon 50mm f/1.8 is $125, while the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 is often marked down to $147.99.
And third party manufacturers sometimes charge more for a Canon mount lens with the same focal length as the MFT version. Sigma does this with the 30mm f/1.4 - charging [$499 for Canon mount] (https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-Lens-Canon/dp/B00BQXL8BU/) and [$339 for micro 4/3] (https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-30mm-F1-4-Contemporary-Micro/dp/B01C3SCKT0/).
Plus, there are unique lenses for MFT that are not available at all in EF or Nikon mount (e.g., the amazing Voigtlander Nokton 10.5mm, 17.5mm, 25mm and 42.5mm f/0.95 lenses).
Yes, Canon crop sensor lenses are sometimes less expensive, but their optical quality isn't the greatest. The kit lens that came with my GH2 was a lot better than the 18-55 that came with my T2i
My comment is going to be a bit more specific to the gif. Everyone has given good info, but I feel like we could quite easily explain the gif.
So Kronk gave a good explanation about focal lengths and f-stops.
Focal lengths are very important in determining two things about the gif. Angle of View and Depth of the Background (not the same as DoF), which are inversely proportional to each other. So as the face of the cat gets more distorted/closer to the lens you can see the background start to get very stretched, this is an effect of the DotB increasing, but the focal length decreasing. That is because of the angle of view increases as the focal length shortens up
Here check these out to get an idea of ultra ULTRA wide view and here you can see some pictures of a telephoto view.
Quickie explanation. Now there are f-stops. f/4 is smaller than f/2.8. f/4 causes less DoF compared to f/2.8. We call the areas where the depth of field really starts to take effect as fall off. There is barely barely any DoF in this gif. I'm going to guess that the f-stop starts low and gets bigger as the focal length increases.
I would buy 7DII over a 6D in a heartbeat hands down more versatile. But I encourage you to buy an older camera since you're just starting out the
BUY THIS 7D with a low shutter count only $600. Still a hell of a camera to start with, lenses are more important.
Canon 10-18mm lens $300
Canon 50mm f/1.8 $120
Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 $650 OR buy a 70-200mm f/4 IS L lens USED off FredMiranda, or buy a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkI L USED off FredMiranda I got my f/2.8L mkI for $1,300 last year the MKII goes for $1,900 or so used but wasn't worth the $600 for me.
Card reader $18
Then get some Sandisk 16gb or 32gb cards
___
Other stuff to think about:
Canon 85mm f/1.8 $360
$130 Flash
Tripod $200
Canon 50mm f/1.4
---
Big purchases way down the road
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mkII L $2,200
A 300mm f/2.8 or even f/4 wouldn't be a bad thing to shoot for either if you really want to do wildlife but not spend over $6,000 on a lens
Canon 1.4 teleconverter $500 this only works with L lenses buy this way down the road if you need more reach.
Canon 16-35mm or 17-40mm L lens
If you want something a bit longer, check out the Canon G7 X Mark I or II. It uses a very, very, very similar (if not completely identical) sensor to the Sony and goes from 24-100mm. Additionally, the older RX100 Mark I and II both have 28-100mm zooms, but at the cost of smaller apertures at the long end: f1.8-f4.9 vs f1.8-f2.8 on the Canon. If you want both a bit more zoom plus brighter aperture, the G7 X series is probably going to be what you're looking for. Splurge for the Mark II if you can because it'll give you more usability improvements over the Mark I in terms of a touchscreen, improved battery life, faster frame rate, and more flexible tilt-screen, but the Mark I still wouldn't be a poor purchase.
Any larger sensors than that, and you'll probably start jumping into the mirrorless interchangeable lens camera market, starting with Micro Four-Thirds by Olympus and Panasonic. They're still on the smaller size, but still a size increase when you consider the lens.
Also one thing to keep in mind is that you shouldn't get too hung up on a zoom multiplier. Some of the highest quality, frequently used, and most expensive lenses out there don't even qualify as "3x", but good god their image quality is stunning. By limiting the amount of zoom that a lens has, that's less the lens designers have to worry about when correcting optical aberrations like distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberrations.
Purely speaking on brands:
I recently did a lot of research into starting lenses and here are my suggestions :)
This lens is used for 'walking around' you can get some wide angle and some good portraits with it. It's very flexible.
This lens is very pricey. Look at Tamron to save the most money (I vouch for it) or Sigma for a little more, but less than the Canon.
Remember with crop ratio that changes the FL of a lens! Figure out if yo have one or not.
Simple rules of thumb? Save money. Wherever possible. But, always get the best glass you can afford. Glass is greater than body.
Hope this helps - if it does please pay this comment forward, it took a lot of typing so feel free to share with other people in similar questions :D
> 95% of the digital camera/camcorders use digital zoom
This is absolutely, flat out wrong. Optical zoom vs digital zoom
> DSLRS camera bundles usually come with lens that have f1.4 aperture which is great for night time shooting.
This is also absolutely false.
Most popular bundles are shipped with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens or something similar. Sometimes they may have a slightly larger basic zoom lens like this ... you'll notice the average f is f/4-5.6 Which is dark as fuck. You're going to have a LOT of noise and be shooting with a high ISO if you're using a dark ass lens like f/4-5.6 at full zoom.
Now, these are still only up to what, 300mm?
You will notice that the majority of these are fixed or under 100mm.
To even remotely approach the claims you are making, you'd have to be using a lens like this this this or this
> I use my d5100 with bundled lens all the time @ night, gives clean and clear picture even when zoomed.
If it's an 18-55. you can't zoom that much, and it's still more than likely f/3.5-5.6. Which means it's f is 5.6 when at full zoom. What you are seeing is your sensor working well and keeping your high ISO noise down. Put a bundle zoom lens on your camera, go to full zoom on an airplane at night, and then post your shots here.
The L variant, aka fucking expensive as hell.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1375597539&sr=8-3&keywords=canon+70+200+L
A Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II Lens
I know no one is going to get me the Solicut Santoku Knife, because it is out of stock.
Pretty sure nobody is going to get me the Samsung 65" Smart TV or Canon EF 70-200mm Camera lens, either, since they are both over $2000.
My wishlist is mostly just for self reference, though. I didn't put those on there expecting anyone to buy them for me.
Dream gift.
A bit more reasonable.
I usually don't ask people for camera equipment, because of the price tag on 99% of the stuff I want/need. I usually just ask for gift cards for Amazon or Paul C Buff, that way I get get exactly what I want/need and don't have to worry about returning something that someone saw that was "similar" to what was on my list, haha.
https://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0033PRWSW