Customer Reviews

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

5 star:		(146)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

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.

Pros: Lightning fast AF, Incredible Sharpness, Build Quality, Hood Design, Excellent IS
Cons: Price $$$$$, a bit big, a little heavy- not too bad.

WOW is all I can say. After getting over that I spent so much on a lens, this new machine is absolutely amazing. The image quality is top notch. 100% crops can be printed large and I can see every detail. I was in Miami and took some pictures of the big hotels, and was wondering what the names were. I looked at some of the pictures, zoomed in, and saw everything. Even small signs hundreds and hundreds of feet away. The IS adds a new feeling of confidence. No longer do you have to worry about shaking a tiny bit and the shot being out of focus or a bit blurry. Canon has really created an astounding piece of technology surpassing others(Nikon) in the lens market. The build quality, as expected from an L series lens, is made to withstand extreme conditions. The zoom ring is large and easy to use. The buttons for different IS and af/mf are easy to use/see. The new focusing distance allows you to get closer to your subjects, and can get quite close if some cropping is done. The Af is also excellent, and focuses very fast even in low light. Now, price... yes... I recommend thinking about this purchase for a while. 2500 - as of now, is a lot to spend, but if you have the money and really really want it, I highly recommend it. The pouch that it comes with is very nice and the hood is easy to put on and is a better material than other hoods. It does not scratch easily like my 24-70 f/2.8L lens hood does. At all apertures, this thing is sharp. If you are an IQ aficionado, this lens is quite a big step up from Mark 1 especially at f/2.8. For me, sharpness is my big thing, so I wanted the best out there. I did not want to step back in terms of technology and get the first generation of the lens even if it is still very good. In a few years if you decide that you want to sell the lens or change to something else, I can assure you that this will retain its resale value very well. I doubt Canon will be upgrading this in the next 5 years, so the sharpness and awesome Af will pay off in the coming days, months, and years to come.

All in all, the new 70-200 is quite a stunning lens which will continue to be one of or the best in Canon's lineup of pro lenses. If you want it and can afford it without selling your house, I would get it haha but as always, research extensively and weigh your options before buying something at these price levels.

I hoped you liked the review. More info and analysis to come in the future...

Check out my unboxing video here: [...]

Thanks

- Alex

I used the Mark I version for the past six months and although I loved that lens, I sold it on Amazon a month ago (for 1,599!)and then used the cash to upgrade.
I struggled a bit with the high price but, now that I've seen the results, no longer question the decision. The images on the Mark I often had me slightly let down by either the sharpness or the contrast. I've taken hundreds of shots now with the Mark II and am amazed and how good they look right out of the camera. If you are a perfectionist that agonizes over sharpness, this is your lens!

After dreaming about this lens for nearly a year, I finally got one and would love to share my thoughts. Since many reviews online are incredibly technical and complicated, I'll try keeping this as easy-to-understand as possible. If you have questions, please feel free to add comments and I'll do the best I can to answer them.

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS
This lens is absolutely amazing. Ignoring its steep price, large size, and heavy weight to focus solely on the photos it produces, I am incredibly impressed. The images are remarkably sharp, have accurate color rendition, and great contrast. I'm using this primarily on a Canon Rebel T2i, and expect that the results would be even more impressive on a full-frame camera such as the 5D series or 1D/1Ds series (aside from vignetting which is apparently somewhat pronounced on full-frame). If money isn't an issue, stop reading this review and order this lens immediately!

WHAT'S INCLUDED
In the box you get the lens, a lens pouch, a lens hood, and a tripod collar. The benefit of the tripod collar is that you can mount this lens directly onto your tripod (instead of mounting your camera body); this allows you to shift between portrait and landscape orientation easily.

=========================================
PROS AND CONS
Overall, this is a great lens. There are some inconveniences, but these are far outweighed by the benefits of the lens.

PROS
1) Fast. f/2.8 is great for low-light shots that you simply wouldn't be able to get at f/4 or another smaller aperture. This is great for action photography, such as sports or wildlife. Even if you decide to add a 1.4x teleconverter - which will cause you to lose a stop of light - starting off with a wide aperture of f/2.8, you can reach 280mm at f/4.
2) Very fast and silent auto-focus. This is very convenient, especially in lower light situations.
3) Superb image quality. Very sharp, even crops have great detail! This is an ideal lens for portraits due to its image quality, and the long focal range combined with the wide aperture make for some great background blurring.
4) Great Build quality...non-L lenses feel like toys by comparison. If your gear takes a beating, strong build quality is a must. Even if you're gentle with your equipment, it's reassuring to know how tough the construction is.
5) Great IS. Generally, one can ensure a steady shot at the reciprocal of the focal length. Say you're shooting at 70mm, you should shoot at 1/70 second or better on a full-frame sensor. On the APS-C sensor bodies (Rebel line, xxD line, 7D), you have to factor in the 1.6 crop factor, so at 70mm you should in reality be shooting with a shutter speed faster than 1/(70x1.6), or 1/112 second. With four-stop image stabilization, you can hand-hold at much slower speeds than with the non-IS version, allowing you to capture crisp pictures that wouldn't otherwise be possible.
6) Weather Sealing. The IS versions of both the f/4 and f/2.8 Canon 70-200 lenses feature weather sealing, and the non-IS versions don't. If you don't have a weather-resistant camera body (i.e. Rebels, xxD series), this shouldn't make too much of a difference, unless you hope to someday upgrade to a more rugged camera body.

CONS
1) Very expensive, but if you have the money, most certainly worth the investment. If you want to save money you can go with an alternative version of a Canon 70-200 or go with a third-party option (see above).
2) The lens is huge...so huge, in fact, that a photojournalist was killed in 2007 by forces who mistakenly thought his 70-200 2.8 (Mk I) was an RPG. If you don't want such a huge lens but want the range, you can either get the smaller-aperture 70-200 f/4, or the recently released 70-300L.
3) Very heavy. People aren't exaggerating, this lens is heavy to handhold for long periods of time. On a positive note, your photos won't only get better, but your arms will get stronger ;)

=========================================
COMPARED TO ALTERNATIVES
Canon currently has four 70-200 lenses, two with an aperture of f/4 (one of which features IS), and two with an aperture of f/2.8 (one with IS). The old Mark I version of this lens can also easily be found used online.

70-200 f/4 Series (IS and non-IS): The lens being reviewed has an aperture of f/2.8, which lets in twice as much light as a lens with an aperture of f/4. I settled for the slower (smaller-aperture) 24-105 f/4 over the 24-70 f/2.8 due to the IS, but I do at times feel its limitations which is why I wanted f/2.8 for telephoto. If you don't need the wider aperture (i.e. will always be using an external flash, or will mostly be shooting outside in adequate light), the f/4 lenses are sharp and very popular options. If you plan to use your telephoto for action shooting (i.e. sports, wildlife), you're better off with an aperture of f/2.8 so that you can use fast shutter speeds.

70-200 f/2.8 non-IS: Image Stabilization is a luxury that you pay a premium for, but in my opinion it is worth it. While it won't freeze action, it will reduce the photographer's camera shake and make many more images usable. If you have proper form while shooting you might argue that you don't need IS, which is fair. But even if you take precautions to minimize camera shake, it is at times inevitable, and IS really helps in those situations. If you have the money for it, I'd spring for the IS version.

70-200 f/2.8 IS Mark I: I don't own the Mark I, but I have rented it on several occasions and definitely see what others have been talking about this lens being sharper. That being said, I was willing to buy the Mark I but see that people are selling the Mark I used for nearly as much as the Mark II version costs new! It's worth spending a little more for increased sharpness, improved optical quality, and better image stabilization.

Third-party lenses: Manufacturers such as Sigma and Tamron also offer fast 70-200 telephotos, and since I don't have firsthand experience with them, they might be great alternatives for those on a tight budget. Most of the professional photographers I know, however, shoot with Canon lenses, which might say something. If you can afford the Canon lens, go for it as most thorough reviews with extensive testing frequently show they offer superior optical quality, even though third-party offerings might offer more bang for the buck.

=========================================
A NOTE FOR REBEL USERS
I was using my Rebel with a battery grip in order to add counter-weight when using my other L lens (24-105), because I feared such a heavy lens on such a small body would cause my camera to tip over. After using a Meike knock-off of the Canon battery grip for half a year with no problems, I yesterday noticed I must have screwed my grip on too tight, because it wouldn't come off no matter how hard I tried. After Googling this I see that other people have had similar problems with battery grips, even the genuine Canon one. Fortunately I did manage to take it off after following some tips I found online, but I probably won't be reattaching it to be safe (or I'll at least be incredibly careful not to screw it in too tight!). Using the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II with a light camera like a Rebel without a battery grip has been fine so far, so don't feel like you need to get one just to more evenly distribute the weight.

=========================================
RECOMMENDED ACCESSORIES
1. A good filter. I highly recommend you put on a high-quality filter from B+W, Hoya, or another reputable manufacturer on this lens...slapping a cheap filter on such an expensive lens would degrade your image quality, ultimately defeating the purpose of buying such an expensive lens to begin with. I like to keep a UV filter on the lens at all times since it is a great way to protect the front of the lens from getting scratched.

2. A good bag. If I want to lug several flashes, bodies, and lenses, I use the Lowepro AW200 which can easily fit this, but you might have a tougher time finding a suitable holster-style bag. I now use the Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW, which can fit this lens (with hood reversed) on a gripped body.

3. A sturdy tripod. This lens is heavy, so you might be pushing the weight limit of your current tripod. I personally use an Induro AKB0 Tripod Kit (Black), and it's held up great so far. Additionally, I've been using a Joby GP8-BHEN Gorillapod Focus with Ballhead X bundle as a secondary tripod and a pseudo shoulder-rig for video.

=========================================
CONCLUSION
Making a decision on whether to buy such an expensive lens is not easy, but the 70-200 f/2.8K IS II's benefits far outweigh its inconveniences. If you're looking for a great telephoto lens that can quickly capture sharp images - even in low light - this is worth every penny, and I highly recommend it.

I previously owned the version I (v.1) of this lens for almost 2 years. While v.1 had amazed me during my ownership, with IS, with speed, with color, with bokeh.....it does not come close to this new mk2 (v.2) version by any means. I am glad I sold v.1 for 1750 and received 1550 in cash after all fees was deducted (2months ago). Here is why:

Mk2 PRO (vs Mk1):
1) Super sharp at all focal length even wide open at f2.8 (now those 70-200 F4 IS fan boys can't complain about the lack of sharpness on the f2.8 big brother anymore). The shorter minimum focusing distance (mfd) makes this lens even more usable indoor.
2) The focusing speed feels more responsive and accurate. It is also quieter, almost inaudible.
3) IS is truly improved. Although a tiny bit heavier, I still manage to take sharp pics with shutter as slow as 1/15 of a second handheld. (You can put the mk1 on a tripod, and the pic you take with mk1 will always be softer than my mk2 handheld, especially at 200mm)
4) Fluorite element: this is not a gimmick, and the reason it is inside all the larger L white lenses. It really controls light better so images doesn't appear washed out or have unwanted light under extremely bright situation.

CONS:
Price? (Before you own the lens price can be a CONS. Once you use it, it will be a non issue with regards to value/performance ration). Just think about having one zoom from 70mm~200mm that gives you sharp picture wide open through out, that easily translates to 3 to 4 prime lenses (to offer the same sharpness at each focal length)...then think how much you would have to pay for those lenses and how much they would weight together, and how much time you will waste swapping lenses, while with this lens you just turn the focusing ring, shoot, and smile ^_^.

I will post some pictures later on, but so far I am totally satisfied as you probably have seen from other owners. If you can afford to spend the extra 7~800 for this zoom range you need or have always wanted, I guarantee you will not have any remorse. Thank you for reading!

***Similar products I am using include: Canon 40d, ef-s 17-55 2.8is, 100mm 2.8L is Macro, 200mm 2.0L is, 70-200 2.8L is mkII, Canon EOS 7D and tokina 11-16 f2.8. Canon 180mm F3.5L Macro lens (already sold it due to lack of sharpness)***

UPDATE:
Still impressed with 70-200 f2.8L IS mkII. Although 200mm f2L is faster and sharper, better bokeh, color saturation...it does not replace this zoom, due to fixed focal length and weight. I really like the flexibility of this zoom, with it's ultra sharp results and excellent color. This lens will be in my bag permanently, along with 100mm macro, and my 17-55mm (my next zoom lens will be 24-70 2.8L...so I have full coverage from 11mm~200mm all at f2.8) You will not be disappointed I promise.

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.

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!

Prior to purchasing the mark II 70-200mm canon lens, I own and have experience with the canon 200mm 2.0L, 300mm 2.8L and the Mark I version of the 70-200mm canon lens and yes - they are amazing. After reading the rave reviews on this new lens, I was sold on upgrading my Mark I lens with this new version. Unfortunately I am not as pleased as some of the other reviewers. It's a nice lens and has benefits, but it is not the ultimate lens as some reviews suggest.

First, the bokeh is better with the mark I lens (already documented on other sites). Second, the current increase retail price of 33% is steep. Third, I am extremely disappointed with those reviews that suggest this lens is on par with the 200mm 2.0L or the 300mm 2.8L prime lens - it is not comparable.

I will keep both the mark I and II lenses. If I had tested the Mark II lens prior to purchase, I would have realized I am very happy with the original version of this lens and pleased to know I own a great lens that will no longer be available. My suggestion, rent before you buy if you already own the Mark I lens. Don't get stuck in the hype of a new product until you experience it yourself. Both the Mark I and Mark II are Canon quality lenses, but major advances on a great lens is hard to achieve.

Update on 9/1/10:
Canon has recently announced the new fluorite versions of the 300mm and 400mm 2.8 L series lens. They are reported to be lighter weight and improved image quality. From my experience, upgrading a good lens must provide a positive return on investment. I am quite happy with the Mark I and find the upgrade to the Mark II was not necessary. Last round, I purchased the Mark II 70-200mm without testing. With these more expensive lens, I will read the reviews and if the reviews have merit, I will rent or borrow the lens prior to deciding on making a purchase.

I never owned the previous version of this lens, so this comes from the perspective of this lens only. I do, however, own a few other lenses ;)

I was just about to buy the older version of the lens and then this lens came out. Well, then everyone decided to start charging almost the original price for the previous version, so I decided to just get this one... Maybe that was their plan??? hmmm

This lens is fast and clear. I have used this only a few times now and maybe my review will change in the future. But, I used it recently for an engagement session and was able to get great shots, clear, colorful, outstanding!

I also used it indoors recently and was standing next to 2-3 other photographers when I snapped a picture in a dimly lit room. They saw the result on my camera even before I paid attention. Their response was one of awe, they could see detail in the picture that you could not see standing there with the naked eye!

All I can say is read the first reviews here and believe, is it worth it, Yes! Would I do it again? Yes!!

Is this lens for everyone? nope. Will everyone love this lens? absolutely not. If you need this lens in your toolbox is it by far the best lens on the market for its purpose? Definitely.

I have been delaying the purchase of the 70-200 2.8 IS for a couple of years now. To me, the original version of this lens, for the price you were paying, had too many drawbacks to justify it. So I made due with a multitude of other lenses to cover the range that this lens offers. My 70-200 F/4 IS is a dream lens. Sharp throughout the range and wide open, and a manageable size and weight to stick on the front of my camera without thinking twice. I shoot at ISOs on the opposite sides of the spectrum. Either 1600+ or 100. The 4IS was great for most of what I needed it to do. And even in the studio when I am shooting strobes at f/11, I will probably stick to my 4IS.

But then Canon released this updated version of what was a very good lens. And they really delivered a winner. This lens is as good as the F4 ever was and it does one thing it could never ever do...f/2.8.

In the past I was using multiple other lenses to do what this lens can now do. Fast primes stopped down, changing lenses more often then I would like. Now Canon has given us a lens where the only drawback is the size and weight. Yes, this is a HEAVY lens. But in order to get a lens with this range and this aperture, it has to be. I knew what I was getting myself in to and would never take away a star or give a real knock to the lens because of that.

If you don't need the 2.8, don't buy the lens. As someone who shoots concerts, events and even portraits in natural light, this lens was a must have for me. Version 1 kept me away but version 2, even with the price increase, became a must have lens.

This is a great range, especially on a full frame camera. It takes my Kenko 1.4x TC very well. It turns it into an f4, sure, but when you need the extra range, there is no noticeable drop in performance with a TC added to it.

I was definitely hesitant to spend this kind of money on this lens. But that was immediately gone after a couple of weeks using it. It won't be attached to the front of my camera all the time, but I know when I need it it will do everything I need it to and then some.

UPDATE 7-1:
After a couple of months of using this lens I am WOWED after every session. I was a reluctant upgrader at first but this lens has just turned out to be stellar. It is unbelievable in low light.

It has been tack sharp throughout the range and even wide open. It is without a doubt as sharp as my f4 IS ever was. I can't say sharper because you really can't get much sharper unless you pick up a 200 f2 IS and even then you would need to be a pixel peeper. I held onto my f4 IS for about a motnh before finally deciding to let it go. I can deal with the weight if I have to. I actually kinda felt guilty having both of these dream lenses.

Canon has basically cornered this zoom range. Between the f4 IS and f2.8 IS II there is just no way you can produce a better pair of 70-200 zooms. I don't think anyone ever thought zooms would reach the quality they are today. Even the original 2.8 was always considered "good enough". This new version, and it's little brother f4 IS, are just "the best".

I also recently upgraded my 5D classic to a II. The resolving power of this lens shines through at an (unmanageable) 21MPs.