Buy Now, Pay Later
As low as
/ mo
Learn more
- – Up to 36-month term if approved
- – No impact on credit to apply
- – Instant approval decision
- – Secure and straightforward checkout
Ready to go? Add this product to your cart and select a plan during checkout.
Payment plans are offered through our trusted finance partners Klarna, Affirm, Afterpay, Zip, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. No-credit-needed leasing options through Acima may also be available at checkout.
Learn more about financing & leasing here.
Free shipping on this product
30-day returns
Learn more
FREE 30-day refund/replacement
To qualify for a full refund, items must be returned in their original, unused condition. If an item is returned in a used, damaged, or materially different state, you may be granted a partial refund.
To initiate a return, please visit our Returns Center.
View our full returns policy here.
Availability:
Only 7 left in stock, order soon!
Arrives
Thursday, Jul 30
Recently Viewed
Features
- 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
Description
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens increases the speed, performance and optical quality of the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM while maintaining all of the characteristics that have made it a legend for professionals and advanced amateurs alike. This lens features one fluorite and five UD elements for increased optical quality and reduced chromatic aberration. It has a minimum focusing distance of 1.2m/3.9 ft. at all zoom settings, which is useful for photographers in smaller spaces trying to get closer to a subject. A next-generation Optical Image Stabilizer, provides up to 4 stops of correction at all focal lengths. Plus the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM is dust- and moisture-resistant and designed for use in the challenging environments typical of rigorous professional use. From the Manufacturer Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens
Specs & Other Info
| Specification | Details |
|---|---|
| Brand | Canon |
| Aperture | F2.8 |
| Lens Category | Telephoto |
| Mount Compatibility | Canon EF |
| Lens Warranty | 200 months |
| Dimensions | 7.83 x 3.5 x 3.5 inches |
| Weight | 2.9 pounds |
| Model Number | 2751B002 |
| Battery Requirement | 1 Product-specific battery needed |
| Production Status | Currently available |
| Release Date | January 4, 2010 |
| Manufacturer | Canon Cameras US |
Frequently asked questions
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens has a maximum aperture of f/2.8. This allows for enhanced performance in low light conditions and the ability to achieve a shallow depth of field for portraits and detailed shots.
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens is compatible with all Canon SLR cameras, both full-frame and crop sensor (APS-C) models. However, on crop sensor cameras, it will have an effective focal length of approximately 112-320mm due to the crop factor.
Yes, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens features an Image Stabilization (IS) system. This system helps to reduce the appearance of camera shake by up to four stops, making it easier to capture sharp images at slower shutter speeds or while shooting handheld.
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens is highly suitable for sports and wildlife photography due to its fast f/2.8 maximum aperture, which allows for faster shutter speeds to freeze motion. Additionally, its rapid and silent Ultrasonic Motor (USM) autofocus system enables quick and accurate focusing on moving subjects, while the durable build and weather sealing allow for use in various outdoor conditions.
Similar Products
Top Amazon Reviews
🚀 Abunda's Overview
This is our summary and key points to consider based on customer reviews.
The Canon EF 70-200mm lens garners high praise for its remarkable image quality, fast autofocus, and professional appeal, especially in its most recent iteration. Users appreciate its versatility for a wide array of photography needs including weddings, portraiture, and events. While some find the lens heavy, its performance and the resulting image sharpness across various situations outweigh this drawback. The more recent version improves upon its predecessor with even sharper images, quicker focusing, and a more effective image stabilization system.
Pros
- 📸 Remarkable image quality that stands out even among professionals
- 🚀 Extremely fast autofocus, capable of focusing in almost complete darkness
- 🔧 Versatile for a variety of photography needs, from events to portraits
- 🛠 Improved image stabilization in newer versions, facilitating low-light shooting without a tripod
- 👁️ Closer focus capabilities and a zoom feature that does not extend the barrel
Cons
- ⚖️ Noticeable weight, which might be cumbersome in long shooting sessions
- 🏷️ High cost, although justified by the lens's quality and performance
- 🛠 Tripod mount design on the newer version might interfere with quick zoom adjustments
Should I Buy It?
If you're invested in photography, particularly in fields requiring top-notch image quality and versatility, this lens is worth the investment. Its performance, especially in terms of autofocus speed and image sharpness, sets a high standard. Though expensive, the lens's ability to hold its value and its utility in a professional setting may well justify the cost for serious photographers.
Style: Lens Only
I have been lusting after a 70-200 f/2.8 lens for 2 years now. After spending over a month researching which brand and model to get, I realized that I could never be truly happy without The Best. So I was going to get a Mark I version of this lens... until the Mark II came out. Then I had to decide if it was really worth the jump in price. Being that I have a tendency to choose "the best or nothing"... it really didn't take me long to start saving. Again. Disappointed, sure, but the reviews told me that my patience would be rewarded. And it has been. To be honest, I have only used it for a little while so far, so I'll update this review when I have more to say, but so far here's what I can tell you. The weight: It's there. This lens will require a tripod or a monopod for long shoots, unless you are used to it. Update: I am apparently used to it now, because I don't notice it anymore. Image quality: Expletives of an uncouth nature escaped my mouth involuntarily when I first saw the IQ this lens produces for myself. On my 5D Mark II, it's ... well, it's [BLEEP]ing insane! This lens makes my Canon 24-70 F/2.8 L look somewhat soft, even after being micro-adjusted. And believe me, I have a sharp copy! The difference is obvious. Image Stabilization: Very good. I can read the street signs a block away at 200 mm, ISO 100, f/2.8 with a shutter speed of 1/60. [Update: The IS consistently allows me to shoot at 1/13th of a second hand held, even at 200mm and get the shot, sharp. I could not believe my eyes when I first saw this... now I rely on it regularly. It doesn't work every time, but most of the time.] This is where the sharpness really shines, because even relying on IS, it's sharper than my Canon 24-70 2.8 L. But indoors, in a dimly lit room, at f/2.8 and ISO 100, getting shutter speeds of 1/6th to 1/8th of a second, and 200 mm, I was getting motion blur that was faint, but noticeable. It effectively made the resulting image soft, while remaining fully recognizable (and in many cases, usable). I wasn't quite as blown away by that as by everything else, but maybe I should be, considering the number of stops distance that is? This lens is bigger than I expected. It also allows me to shoot through chain link fence without being impeded by that fence - if the subject is more than 15 feet away. Last I went to the zoo, I was shooting a 28-135, and the 135/f3.2 wasn't enough to blur the fence out. My uncle was shooting a 28-300 Nikon lens at f/6.3, and was getting great shots I could not get because his lens at 200-300 mm was blurring the fencing out. Now I can not just shoot the things he can shoot, but completely blow away the image quality his lens gets!!! My first impression: Blown away. Breathlessly in awe. Ho-Lee-[BLEEP]! I have to say, I think my 24-70 L is feeling dejected now. That price tag you see on this baby? It's also [BLEEP]ing insane. But when you consider the factors - quality of build, quality of image, quality of IS, light gathering power, and the reasonable expectation that this will be a purchase you only have to make once to get literally a lifetime of exceptional use and value out of the thing - it is worth what it costs. Every penny. I wasn't sure I'd agree with the others here saying that, but I do. Just one word of warning: if you buy this lens, be careful. It's so sharp, you may reasonably worry about cutting your eyes looking the results. :) More when I have put her through her paces. Update 01-06-2011: Disappointingly, I have not had as many opportunities to use this lens since I bought it as I would have liked. My 24-70 has been my workhorse lens because of the very close quarters I have been working in recently. However, I have a few points you might be interested in. First, micro adjustment with my copy proved entirely unnecessary. at -5, there was a noticeable loss of detail; +0 to +5 are indistinguishable and as sharp as it gets. Had it set for +3 for a while, but literally, even at 200% magnification, you just cannot tell the difference between 0, +3 and +5. Second, my copy is sharpest at f/6.3. Kind of a surprise, since I was expecting 5.6. Third, if you're not used to using IS, it can take some getting used to, waiting a moment for the IS to stabilize. This has cost me sharpness in a lot of situations where it was critical. For some people, this lens will take time to get used to. For a little while, I thought my lens was somehow regressing in sharpness. Turns out I'm not giving it time to settle the IS. Fourth, to my utter amazement, IS actually has shown noticeable improvement in image quality hand held even up to a shutter speed of 1/8000th of a second in recent tests. I thought it would degrade image quality after 1/200th, but this appears not to be the case for my copy. Astounding. Update 11-07-2011: I now turn to this lens as a matter of common sense when the light is low. f/2.8 24-70 cannot keep up with this lens in very low light because of it's IS capability. It's as good as or better than my 16-35 on that point because the IS is so good. I would prefer to just leave this lens on my camera all the time, but foot zoom is not always a reasonable option, so the 24-70 still wins out most of the time simply because I use those focal lengths a lot in tight quarters. But this is my overall favorite lens, in spite of that fact.
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on September 2, 2010 by SLM
Style: Lens Only
You probably have already done your research on this lens, so I will come at this review with a different approach. At first, I owned the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras. This particular lens was my first L lens and I was DEFINITELY blown away by the image quality and speed of the auto-focus. I wanted the 70-200 IS version II, however, I could not afford it at that time. The 70-200 2.8 NON-IS is very amazing. I've shot events, weddings, and models with this lens and BOY, this was a lens that captivated on-lookers and brought lots of customers to me. Having a "white" lens tends to give you a professional look as everyone drawn to the 70-200 thought I have been a professional for many years however, at that time, I'd only been serious for a couple of months. It was definitely heavy, however, I wasn't bothered by it unless I was shooting a wedding with it. Even though this lens didn't have IS, I learned how to utilize my flashes to the best of my ability so that I wouldn't have to spend too much time shooting under 1/200th of a second. Check out the Speedliter's Handbook: Learning to Craft Light with Canon Speedlites if you want to learn how to master various Canon flash techniques. I also have a Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras. Even though the 17-55 is VERY sharp, the 70-200 2.8 NON-IS is even sharper however, not by a blow-out. The auto-focus is just TOO FAST! It seems to focus very well in complete darkness and when mounted on my Canon EOS 7D 18 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD (Body Only), my only issue is staying humble because I know I'm about to take some great images, as long as I shot between 1/200th and 1/250th of a second of course. One thing I needed with the NON-IS "is" image stabilization. I got tired of being limited by my x-sync speed of 1/250th and 1/200th respectively. I saw lots of shots that I wanted with only the ambient light, however, my keeper rate below 1/200th was not very great, and when I'm in the "zone" I didn't want to think about adjusting my shutter speed to my zoom range. My clients still had a great amount of pictures, however, I knew that if I wanted to go to the next level, I needed image stabilization. Sooooo, the search was on! I never stopped stalking the 70-200 IS II however, for a while, I thought of getting the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 APO EX DG HSM OS FLD Large Aperture Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera. This is the part I need everyone to pay attention because there are not a lot of reviews on the Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS. As far as my research and experiments are concerned, the Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS IS A STEAL!!!!! It was a tad bit sharper than my Canon 70-200 NON-IS, the auto-focus is just as fast, and it is a little ligher in weight than my Canon 70-200 NON-IS! Maybe the Sigma version was sharper because of it's OS (Optical Stabilization), Sigma's version of image stabilization. Also, at the time of this review, the Sigma 70-200 OS is about $600 cheaper than the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II and the Sigma version also has 4 stops of stabilization. So, you may be asking yourselves this, "Why did he choose the Canon version over the Sigma if the Sigma version is A STEAL?" There were a couple of reasons. 1. I fell in love with the attention I received from having a white lens. 2. The Canon version has a focus limiter switch. 3. The Canon version focuses almost a foot closer! 4. The Canon version is a little sharper. 5. The Canon version is weather sealed. To be honest, numbers 1 - 3 matter the most to me. The other reasons are not very significant. After I bought the 70-200 version II, to be honest, at first I thought it isn't much sharper than the NON-IS nor the Sigma 70-200 OS. Turn the IS switch off, and you have the 70-200 NON-IS all over again, quality wise in my opinion. Version II is noticeably heavier that the NON-IS. I did notice the better lens hood on version II though. I wasn't upgrading for quality though, I just needed IS and BOY, was I stabilized! I also have a Kenko 1.4X PRO 300 Teleconverter DGX for Canon EOS Digital SLRs. When I put the version II on the Kenko 1.4 tele-converter, I was able to zoom in to 280mm and pull off sharp shots at 1/5th of a freakin second handheld!!!! OMG!!!! I know at first I said that version II is not much sharper than the non-is, however, I did more testing and I proceeded to cuss myself out for being a complete idiot! At 2.8, this lens is STUPID SHARP!!!!! The NON-IS is pretty good at 2.8, and stopping down to 8.0 showed me crazy sharpness, however, the version two is just as sharp at 2.8 as the non-is at 8.0! I almost feel like there is no reason to stop down to 8.0 on version II, if you are concerned about sharpness. I also used to never shoot above 4000 ISO however, with version II, I see great shots at 6400 ISO with my 7D! I even have a better keeper rate at 12400 ISO with my 7D! I still need to test version II on my Canon EOS Rebel T1i 15.1 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD and EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens to see if I get similar results. I also learned the benefits of having a focus limiter switch on version II. The non-is has one, however, I never really experimented with it. Also, the auto-focus of version II is just as fast as the Sigma OS and the Canon non-is version. Let me use this paragraph to give the Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS it's props. The fact that it can be compared to the king of all 70-200s says a lot about Sigma. I was shooting the Dallas Fashion Week of 2012 and I saw a fellow photographer knocking down GREAT shots with the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 APO EX DG HSM OS FLD Large Aperture Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera! From her LCD screen at least, I couldn't tell the difference between her Sigma and my Canon. Also, if you wouldn't like a lot of attention from a white lens, the Sigma version could suit you fine. Had I not been able to afford version II, I would have bought the Sigma version in a heartbeat! So, the bottom line is this: If you have the funds, go either Sigma or Canon. You won't go wrong with either. If you want to use your lens as a sort of marketing assistant, go for Canon. You "will" be approached by potential clients at public events. If you want the "best of the best" go Canon version II. If you want to save money and get a great deal, go Sigma. I'm only saying this because the Sigma OS version is STUPIDLY underrated! If you are a pixel peeper, you already know you need only Canon L quality. Now, if weight is an issue, you better go ahead and get the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras. I have also tested out that lens and it is ligher than my 17-55! Also, from my research, I hear that it is just as sharp as 2.8 version II. Some sources report F4 IS as being sharper than 2.8 version II! One more point, if you don't need 2.8, just go ahead and get the F4 IS. If you study hard with strobist photography, you can get by without needing to go below F4 for in-door events, if flashes are allowed wherever you shoot. Before I bought version II, because I'm pretty good with off-camera flashes, I rarely shot below f-stop 5.0, even with my 17-55! Check out Captured by the Light: The Essential Guide to Creating Extraordinary Wedding Photography if you want more info on off-camera lighting. I didn't chose F4 IS because I wanted to have more creative options with F2.8. At times, the white lens can be bothersome. It `is' heavy, and I've noticed that I get tired a lot quicker with version II than the non-is. Also, you may want to pull off some discrete photos however, the white color will tattle-tale on you sometimes. I'm considering getting the Lenscoat Neoprene Lens Cover for Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II Lens (Black) for those particular moments. I can't believe God has actually blessed me with such a powerful weapon! What made buying this lens a tad better is that Amazon gave me a $100 discount as a gold box deal! I have been watching this lens since it came out and I have prayed about getting this lens as well. It is definitely a blessing to have this lens and even though 1,969.00 is very steep, it is DEFINITELY worth every penny! PS: If you are saving up for this lens, I have noticed that the best time to buy this lens is during the holidays. Right now, at the time of this post, the price is $2,069.00. For the majority of the year this lens may be $2,399.00 or above! That could make the Sigma OS version more attractive as it will then be $1,000 cheaper!
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on January 24, 2012 by J. Patterson
Style: Lens Only
The 1st version was my favorite zoom in my bag which had the 16-35mm 2.8L and the 24-70 2.8L because it was so much sharper than the other two. I was really happy with the 1st version and wouldn't have replaced it if this never came out. Now that the price has come down, about $130 from the original price, that should pay for a good B+W 77mm UVA (Ultra Violet) Haze MRC Filter #010. Don't gimp this lens with a plastic coaster from Ritz! The image stabilization improvement is noticeable! Before I sold the 1st version for $1,550 (June 2010), I compared the two indoors handheld. I couldn't believe how 1 stop of IS really improved the quality and sharpness of the photos in low light. With a crop sensor camera Canon EOS 7D 18 MP, Canon EOS 50D 15.1MP, or Canon EOS Rebel T2i 18 MP, this lens is effectively: 112mm - 280mm. It works great with the Canon EF 1.4X II Extender Telephoto Accessory, it brings the max aperture down to f4, but it is still pretty sharp. Paired with a 7D or any other 1.6 crop lens, it will become a 156mm - 448mm lens! I use with this lens with my 7D or the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. It works perfect for both and did not feel like I had to Micro Adjust the focus. For 1st time buyers of this lens. - Watch canonpricewatch dot com. - If you never owned an L lens, you will be shocked at how sharp this is (then again, most L lenses should have that effect) - If you never had Image Stabilization, this will allow you to take sharper photos indoors. It will reduce motion blur from lens movement, but not from the subject where the larger aperture has greater effect. - It is weather sealed (you'll notice a black o-ring at the mount) - you'll need to add a lens filter to complete the sealing. - You can use this for sports to portrait photography. For portraits, you get excellent bokeh at 200mm / f2.8 (the smooth background blur where your subject is in focus) For those upgrading from the original Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, I didn't think there was much to improve on (I was wrong!) - That lens came out in September 2001, so you are taking advantage of 9 years of technological advancement - The buttons are designed better - I hated how I always switched to MF when shooting! This is now a non-issue (no need to tape it down) - Second generation Image Stabilization technology that is silent, you could hear the motor sound of the gyro in the first version. You get 4 stops vs 3 stops IS. - Improved optics - it has one fluorite and five UD elements for increased optical quality. You get reduced flare, which improves contrast (Your brain tells you it is "sharper") - This focuses much closer at 1.2m/3.9 ft (improved by 8.1" at 200mm) - better for tight indoor portraits - Focuses faster and quieter - Larger focus grip area - Improved hood Canon ET-87 - it has a lock that makes it easier to put on and remove. It has a different texture that is less susceptible to scratches. - Bottom line, it is worth the upgrade, especially if you plan to keep it for many years. Cons It is expensive - but you get what you pay for It is heavy, especially if you never owned L glass, but to maintain a fixed aperture at f2.8 throughout the zoom range requires lots of glass! Just stop being a wimp already. Tips: There are two modes of Image Stabilization: I rarely take it off Mode 1, but use Mode 2 if you plan to pan left or right (to follow a car or someone running) The focus distance selector is handy, be sure to use if you find that it isn't focusing indoors, it could be that you selected 2.5m - infinity. Take off the tripod collar if you hand hold it a lot - it just gets in the way sometimes.
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on July 3, 2010 by Gary Cruz
Style: Lens Only
Like you, I'm guessing, I debated back and fourth about whether to buy this lens or go with another less costly option. I'd read the reviews both here and online at the various sites. Already owned a 100 Macro IS L and 135mm f2 L and 200mm F2.8L II. All, by the way, are outstanding lenses! I even had the 70-200 f4 IS L that is considerably smaller and lighter than this lens. But I was never crazy about the "bokeh" the f4 L IS version gave me. So I sold it and just shot my primes. No question, the primes I own are truly great optics. Even the often forgotten 200mm 2.8L II produces spectacular results. But I had few recent shoots, where my subjects were constantly moving and I found myself not able to reposition myself, get closer or further away quickly enough when needed and inevitably missed some key shots because I could not change lenses quickly enough. Did what I could afterwords in Photoshop, but results could have been better. That frustrated me. So came here, and would read, reread the user reviews and almost click "Add to Cart" several times. Finally gave in and just did it. Figured the worst scenario was I'd test it against my current lenses and if it didn't hold up, I'd neatly pack it back into the box and return it. As soon as I go the lens, unpacked it and after being thoroughly impressed with the build quality, the nice lens case and hood, I got out my tripod and other prime L glass and shot it against this 70-200 IS L II. To put it in a nutshell "WOW"!! The lens truly has amazing image quality, far better than I anticipated. On a tripod, the results for all the lens were great. Though, to my eye the contrast and flare control was better on this zoom. Seem to also focus more accurately and frankly felt faster to lock on to subject. Hand-held, this zoom came into its own, especially against the non-IS primes. It wasn't even close. The 4-stop IS on this new zoom is a great, great tool and welcome addition. That alone, for me, justifies this purchase. It will be the difference between an image that can be enlarged greatly and one that 'just missed' due to camera shake that becomes visible as you start to enlarge the image. Focusing, build quality are all 5 Stars and so good that I love not having to worry about either or second guess the focusing system or wonder if I had shot it with a prime would it have been sharper when I'm shooting. If you shoot with a monopod or tripod, the primes are terrific, no question. Canon makes great L Glass. But if you find yourself shooting hand-held and considering this lens...just do it. Don't waste the hours I did, staring at the computer screen debating and reading everything I could find on this lens. Just buy it, you'll sleep better I promise! Cons, if I'd have to say anything negative thus far, I wish it were less expensive by say $500 dollars or so. It's a fair amount of money to give up for non-exotic focal length, I believe it's double the cost of the f4 IS L version. That's a steep entry fee into the land of f2.8. But the 'bokeh' is better and I bought this lens to shoot wide open. I can't comment on whether the 'bokeh' is better than the previous 70-200 L IS. I have read the older lens produced "less busy" background blur. I'm perfectly happy with what I see coming from this current lens. But truth be told, it's a lens I see myself using more than just about all the my other with the possible exception being the 50mm. The other con, we've all read is about the weight, and yes it's heavy, but when mounted to the camera and in use, it doesn't feel cumbersome. I'm sure sitting in a shoulder bag, carrying it around for a few hours will become fatiguing. For that, I'd tell you to get a good photo backpack. It makes a world of difference in terms of dealing with the weight. Believe me, I learn that the hard way on a full day shoot up in the Utah mountains. I now use a Kata Ultralight photo backpack, that I love. Only one I believe with a trampoline mesh frame on the backside, so sweaty, smelly back is not the concern it used to be. Good structure to the pack too! Anyhow, got off on a tangent. Would I recommend this lens, ABSOLUTELY!! It's a keeper! I'm NOT second guessing myself at all on this one. Thank you to everyone here that wrote their hands-on reviews that helped me make a decision! Hope my review helps someone that's on the fence like I was.
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on January 20, 2011 by Bulldog
Style: Lens Only
Like so many others here, I sold my Canon 70-200 2.8L IS, version 1, in order to move to this lens. The 70-200 L was always my prime go-to lens if I wanted absolutely crisp clean shots. Weddings, portraiture, landscape shots...the original lens always came through for me. This iteration is even sharper, faster focusing, and more conducive to wonderful photographs. It's a tad heavier, so the specs say, but you really won't notice the difference. There's no question that this is a heavy lens. You won't use it to walk around a theme park - for that, go with Canon's 70-300 DO lens, which is MUCH lighter and gives you the extra 100mm albeit at the expense of speed and some photographic quality. For tripod-based HDR photography, there's really no lens among Canon's zooms that will serve better. In combination with Canon's 28-70 L lens, you'll have everything that you really need. Your only alternative would be to have a series of prime L lenses, and this lens frankly holds up VERY well against the primes. This lens has some key features, including a zoom ability that doesn't change the length of the barrel, the ability to override the autofocus on the fly without turning off the AF (I have a split circle focusing screen in my 50D which works beautifully with this lens, thanks to the 2.8 aperture...just like the old days), closer focus capabilities than the last version, and an even better IS system than the original version of the lens. One thing I immediately noticed with this lens is its ability to quickly focus on the subject's eyes. For some reason, my original lens always left me focused on the nose, and if I didn't correct it I'd end up with soft eyelashes. The precision of focus with this second version seems to routinely be just a tad better than on the original...I'm being picky here but I like printing out my photos at 17x22 so accuracy of focus is critical and lack of accuracy can't be overcome just by sharpening with Photoshop. Yes, the cost is ridiculous, but Canon's L lenses generally hold their value reasonably well. I wouldn't go so far as to think of it as an investment, but you could easily sell the lens for a significant percentage of its original cost, even in years to come. Use it for a few revenue-producing shoots, and you'll be all set. And just as with stereo systems where the bulk of your investment should be in the speakers, with photography, the bulk of your investment should be in the lens. If your choice is between, say, the 7D and a lesser lens or the 60D and this lens, the combination with this lens is the direction to go. You can always upgrade the camera back down the road, and again, this lens will really shine with a full frame back (it also balances well with the heavier back than with the lighter weight cameras like the 60D). My only gripe is that the tripod mount on this lens is slightly longer than it was on the last version - so long that it interferes with the ability to quickly grab the zoom ring and make adjustments. Yes, I could remove the tripod mount altogether and solve that problem, but the tripod mount makes a handy handle for carrying the rig when it's not around my neck - it's perfectly balanced around that - so I'd rather leave it on. I'll figure this out eventually and get used to it, and it's a small gripe given the overall positive experience in the upgrade. I very rarely give a product 5 stars, but this lens truly is the best in its class.
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on September 25, 2010 by Dr. Stuart Gitlow
Style: Lens Only
This lens is indeed incredible... Incredible build quality and image quality. The sharpness throughout the entire frame and the color renditions are simply superb. Many people have covered the IQ already and several websites did the scientific tests, therefore, my short review will be about the handling in the field. This lens is INCREDIBLY HEAVY! On paper, its only 3.3 lbs, about a pound (440g) heavier than my EF70-300L. A mere pound but it feels like its wrist-snapping ten more pounds heavier when carrying it around. The lens didn't balance well with my 60D (with/without the grip). This lens is so huge that it took 3 lens spots to fit it in my pack. If you're trying to decide which Canon telephoto lens to get, then here's my two cents. If you're a portrait or sports photographer, and you're getting paid to use this lens (or paying someone to carry it for you) then this lens is perfect and there's no alternative (but you already knew that). If you're more into landscapes and wildlife photography, trust me, you don't want to carry this lens around while hiking. For those applications, I would suggest getting the EF70-300L. The EF70-200 IS II has a shorter reach and you'll need an 1.4 Extender to get the same reach as the EF70-300L. That's more $$ and another half a pound of weight added, not to mention you'll lose 1.4 stops of light. Or you can always get both!
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on February 20, 2012 by Christian
Style: Lens Only
It is uncommon that you find average review scores for a solid 5 stars ... This is one of those products that doesn't really have a fence to sit on - meaning, if you're on the fence just add this thing to your cart and don't look back. Many will shutter (or shudder, sorry, bad pun!) at the price of this lens,..., without a doubt I did. But if you're a professional or an amateur photographer (as myself) that simply want the best image possible with a wide aperture and great image stabilization, you will know after you take your first picture that every dime you spent on this lens was worth it! Tack-sharp images with great color saturation and beautiful bokeh at every focal length. As I've read somewhere, this lens will quite possibly replace every prime that you own in between the 70-200mm range. Honestly, the only one it might not be able to replace is the 85mm f/1.2L just due to its sheer insane aperture size! But in saying that, this hand-sized bazooka, I mean cannon, or Canon, also doubles as a phenomenal portrait lens - the very top of many professional must-have portrait lenses. The build quality is second-to-none, something you notice instantly as you unbox the lens - it just feels and screams quality. Lens is wicked fast to focus, to boot! While it has spent most of its time hand-held yielding great results, my photos of it attached to a tripod with mirror lock-up have been out of control, scary good. Sorry I just don't really know how to describe its effortlessness, just check out the photos I and many others have posted here for this thing. One of the common CONS (other than price) from other reviewers I found was regarding the weight - this thing after all, scales in about 1.5kg, about 3.2pounds. I attach it to a 5D3 and in total I've got about 5lbs I'm lugging around with only a hand strap (the neck straps just get in my way). While I do try to workout regularly and yet am no Arnold, I've walked around with this combination for 4-5 hours at a session and will admit that my right arm and shoulder do get a bit tired after a while. But I'll be honest, when I line up a great shot and just know that this thing will produce a 'wow' photo, like the background that this thing renders, the fatigue in the arm and shoulder just blur away smoothly. At this point, I have this lens attached so frequently that any other smaller lens just feels too light and inadequate (keep in mind that this maybe just an ego thing because you WILL draw looks and camera/lens-envy!). As I've stated at the beginning of the review, yeah, you see a ton of 5-stars out there. You see another from me and I'm not one to give them out easily. Don't take my word however, your hard-earned cash is too valuable in today's crazy world. If you are unsure about this lens and no one would blame you given its hefty price tag - rent it, determine if the range of focal lengths, aperture width, sharpness, image-stabilization capabilities, weight, and of course price are all something you can live with. Keep in mind there are 3 other variants of this focal length range that also might nicely fit your needs - they are all gems themselves from all the reviews I've read. This one does carry quite a premium however. One that I was willing/able to live with and haven't ever looked back. I used to say that my favorite lens was the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro - a simply godly lens for its performance/price consideration. After making the plunge and getting acquainted with this lens however, all I can say is "why play favorites, it's nice to have options!" If you come to the decision and I know it can be a big one given the price of this beast, you won't ever regret it or get a case of buyer's remorse. It'll just bring a big smile to your face! Best of luck and good shooting!
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on August 4, 2012 by Mark
Style: Lens Only
When I shoot weddings, family photos, and outdoor events, this is one of the first lenses that goes on my camera. I originally had the Mark I version and it was tack sharp. I was not disappointed with the Mark II as well. The question some of you may have is whether it's worth coughing up the extra cash for image stabilization (IS) or not. The IS, for the average photographer will probably add two stops or more of stability. This becomes important, especially if you have a crop sensor camera because the effective focal length gets multiplied. I believe, for the Canon crop sensor DSLR's (such as the 7D and Rebels) will multiply the focal length by 1.6 making this a 112-320mm lens. Fully zoomed out, any slight hand movement can make your photos blurry. IS will also extend your shooting time into the sunset hours without a tripod. If you are looking at L-series lenses such as this one, you probably understand that good lenses can make all the difference and well worth the investment. My advice is, if you can afford it, get the IS version, or wait till you can save the money for it. That way you won't have buyer's remorse and wished you had bought the IS version a month after you buy the NON-IS version. If you are already stretching the budget for the NON-IS version, then get that one and a decent and light tripod. Either way, you won't be disappointed with the lens. The bokeh (the out of focus background) is soft and pleasant. Fully zoomed, it provides quite a narrow depth of field and makes your subject pop out of the background. The focal length works very well for portrait work and allows you to work from quite a distance from your subject, which is nice for people that are not used to being in front of the camera, as they don't feel like you're right in their face! Pros: Great quality, tack sharp, shallow DOF, and nice bokeh. Whisper quiet focus motor and very fast to focus. Cons: It's a little heavy, but its the price you pay for quality.
...
show more
Reviewed in the United States on January 26, 2014 by IShopOnLine