Checking for product changes
Buy Now, Pay Later
As low as
/ mo
Learn more
- – Up to 36-month term if approved
- – No impact on credit
- – 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, PayTomorrow, Affirm, Afterpay, Apple Pay, and PayPal. 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
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 4 left in stock, order soon!
Arrives
Sunday, Jun 22
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
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
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