# 70-200/4IS broken, rethinking tele options



## Selwin (Feb 1, 2011)

Any birders or the like on this forum? I could use some expert tele advice for Canon gear.

Current kit:
5D (not mkII!), 24-105, 16-35II, 50/1.8, broken 70-200/4 IS, 135/2

My shooting subjects are changing a bit, so before rushing to order a new copy of the same lens, I want to give this some thought and I could use some help.
These are the features I'd like to add to my kit:
- More ISO for weddings. On my 5D (not a mkII), 800 is borderline for me for large prints
- More tele for travel and wildlife shooting
- HD movie shooting would be nice

I did some homework and came up with these combo's:
Combo A: 7D + 70-200/4IS + 400/5.6. Pros: cost. Cons: 1.6x crop sensor for weddings? Will need another mid range zoom for that
Combo B: 5DmkII + 70-200/2.8II + 1.4xIII + 2xIII (all newly released) Pros: compact kit, FF sensor for weddings is my preference. Cons: limited tele range (400mm)
Combo C: 5DmkII + 70-200/4IS + used 300/2.8IS + 1.4xIII + 2xIII Pros: IQ for tele work. Cons: cost, bulky kit for traveling

Questions:
1. Which mid range zoom (that is at least as sharp as my 24-105 on FF) for shooting weddings with a 7D?
2. How much crop room do I have on a 5DmkII + 70-200/2.8II w 2x extender III?
3. 70-200/2.8II+2x extenderIII vs. 400/5.6: how about bokeh and sharpness? I don't need IS for tele wildlife.
4. Any other combo's you can recommend?
Thank you very much!


----------



## RikkFlohr (Feb 2, 2011)

I will give it a go: 

1. You won't find a wider mid-range zoom as sharp as your 24-105. The 16-35 is probably as close as you will come.
2.  Not sure what you mean by crop room?
3. the 70-200 combo is more versatile but it is also more surfaces to clean and will not be as sharp as a 400.  I would still prefer to have the converter/70-200 in my bag if I had to choose. It is just that more versatile.
4. If you are truly into birds, I would recommend getting the 300 F4IS. Lighter, faster and very sharp. One caveat, the 2x converter will make it too dark to autofocus. 

Combo C looks like the more versatile bet. 

It is hard to advise because you really need two separate kits. A full-frame low light wedding kit and a crop sensor long telephoto.  Trying to make one set work for all is going to be difficult.


----------



## Selwin (Feb 4, 2011)

RikkFlohr said:


> I will give it a go:
> 
> 1. You won't find a wider mid-range zoom as sharp as your 24-105. The 16-35 is probably as close as you will come.


Quite. The 24-105 is a very good lens. I was just working on my 1st LR pass for 2200 images from our Florida trip when I came across a picture of my 5-year old daughter. Convinced it was taken with my 70-200/4IS, I thought "wow, my 70-200 has very nice bokeh" when it turned out it was taken with the 24-105 @105mm.


> 2.  Not sure what you mean by crop room?


I meant that if I have 21mp to play with instead of 13mp, can I make smaller crops and still retain IQ. Nevermind, it was a silly question because it all depends on the format of the final print.


> 3. the 70-200 combo is more versatile but it is also more surfaces to clean and will not be as sharp as a 400.  I would still prefer to have the converter/70-200 in my bag if I had to choose. It is just that more versatile.


The thing is that when seeing my Florida pics I am disappointed again in the IQ of the 70-200/4IS. Yes it is sharp, but images don't come to life like they did with my Nikkor 80-200/2.8 (back from the days when I was still on film). I think it's because of the background OOF areas. I can't seem to isolate my subjects well except when they are 10-30 feet away. So I'm curious as to whether the 70-200/2.8II will do better bokey wise. If I then were to choose the 70-200/2.8II + new extenders, I would not only have a better wildlife lens, but also a better 70-200 for weddings/portraits and for travel. I've decided I will first go that route and hire the bloody thing and the III-series extenders to test it on my 5D. Then I will hopefully be pleased with that and use it for tele work, both for local shooting and travel.


> 4. If you are truly into birds, I would recommend getting the 300 F4IS. Lighter, faster and very sharp. One caveat, the 2x converter will make it too dark to autofocus.


I've thought about that too, but I feel it is limited in range. Here it is: I really prefer to stay on FF and I don't want to get more than one new dslr anyway so it will be the 5DII or (more likely) its successor. A 300/4IS can become a 420 with the converter and that's it. I'd be more tempted to use the 70-200/2.8II + converters, which gets me to 280 and 400mm for the time being  and then after my wallet has recovered from the shock go and try to get a used 300/2.8IS (previous model). I will have the extenders already and I would have 600mm range.



> Combo C looks like the more versatile bet.


Exactly. I'd rather spend 2.500 on a used 300/2.8 than 1200 on a crop camera. But I will have to spread the spending over some time.



> It is hard to advise because you really need two separate kits. A full-frame low light wedding kit and a crop sensor long telephoto.  Trying to make one set work for all is going to be difficult.


All of this got me started because my 70-200/4IS is broken and I stand before the decision to either get the same lens or a different one. I think I can hold off getting another camera until after the introduction of the 5DmkIII or similar FF.

I want to thank you for responding, it has really helped me.

Selwin


----------



## Selwin (Feb 28, 2011)

Selwin said:


> I've decided I will first go that route and hire the bloody thing and the III-series extenders to test it on my 5D. Then I will hopefully be pleased with that and use it for tele work, both for local shooting and travel.Selwin


Reporting back now. I rented a 70-200/2.8IS II to shoot my best friend's wedding. I must say this is an awesome lens. Very very useful range for weddings (I knew that from my 70-200), but also extremely useful in low light situations. I was shooting in a church with just a few windows. It was a very dark overcast day, so the lights that were switched on was my main light source. I'm not a very good flash photographer so I decided to set ISO to 1600 and see. First I tried my 135/2.0. I set it to f/2.5, 1/100th sec. It has no IS and I was shaking like Stevens. Must have been the pressure, because I usually have a very steady hand. Fairly good shots, but all of them just a bit blurred (only noticable at 100%). Then I tried my 50/1.8 @f/1.8. Dreadful. Sharpness nowhere to be found. I guess I have to toss that lens and get another one, or get a 1.4 version with hopefully better quality. Up till now I had blurred and unsharp images. It was so bad, that I could easily see it on the 5D screen and some of you may know that a 5D screen is not easy to use for sharpness because it's not sharp to begin with, even if the images are.
So then I started using the 70-200/2.8ISII. It's the heaviest lens I have handled in a long time. The last time was three years ago when I was still shooting my F6 with 80-200/2.8 AF-D (2-ring) Nikkor. The weight was very noticeable, but seeing sharp images one after the other helped me to get used to it real quick. I was nearly euphoric, but I had to restrain myself as the vicar was reading from the holy books. Then a traditional Hindi dancer appeared on the scene. I had shutter speeds ranging from 1/40th to 1/100th, at various focal lengths. Any blur came from the dancer, not from my hands. And firing enough shots at the right poses gave me a lot of really sharp images. When sitting at my new LR machine (some of you may know I recently got a new one) I was really amazed. 

I know I couldn't have made these shots with my 70-200/4IS. The bokeh was very delicate and I took all shots at f/2.8. This lens has very good contrast and sharpness wide open, and not only in the centre. Later that day I used the lens to take candids during the diner party. Not being IQ critical photographs, I set my 5D to ISO 3200, mounted the 70-200/2.8ISII and fired away. 200mm, 1/40th sec, no problem for this lens. I got quite a few good shots in this low lit italian restaurant.

So am I going to run to the store (and my bank account) and order it? I'm still undecided. This lens really delivers in these shooting circumstances. But then again I don't shoot weddings that often. I'm convinced this lens won't ever let me down and I know I can use it with a 2x extenderIII to get a nice 140-400mm. 

Tomorrow I'm going to sell my F6 gear that has been gathering dust for 3 years now and see how much that brings in. I'm counting on 900 Euro's. It includes a 35-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, F6, F80 w/ 35-70/3.3-4.5. Maybe I will take the plunge and order this lens. And then decide whether I will sell my 70-200/4IS, which is being repaired at the moment. Will let you know if you like to.

Selwin


----------



## Selwin (Mar 31, 2011)

Selwin said:


> [....]I think I can hold off getting another camera until after the introduction of the 5DmkIII or similar FF.Selwin


 I'm not sure if I still want to wait for a 5DIII or similar camera, now that Canon stock in Japan may (or may not) be contaminated. One of Canon's factories is very close to the disaster area. I don't know if the 5DmkIII and 70-200/2.8ISmkII are produced in that factory, but it could be and I'm inclined to take no risk and order both products from local stock just to be on the safe side. I have no confidence whatsoever in European import policies regarding stuff from Japan.
Don't get me wrong, I feel absolutely terrible for all Japanese people affected by the tragedy and I'm aware that my personal interest in this matter has to be considered minute compared to what is happening to them, but still there is a risk. I guess I'm just one of those people who wants to eliminate any risk before doing something. It is my fate. But then I suppose you already noticed, eh?

The upside is, that I would have some new gear to play with sooner than I thought I would.

Any thoughts?

Thanks, Selwin


----------



## rjalex (Apr 15, 2011)

Selwin took a quick glance at your post. I own both the 5Dmk2 and the 7D and personally find the IQ of the former so much better that the 7D lies in my bag only as a backup camera. I'm personally willing to have a less brilliant AF, slower burst rate but a better IQ. YMMV of course.

Canon's Fusukshima plant produced only Canon's printers. The radiation levels at the plants where the lenses are produced is considered safe for people AND even though I am not a pysicist I would urge you to get a more authorititative opinion on what risks would an glass/metal object exposed to radiation pose to your health. It would be immensely sad if the economy of Japan after being hit by this immense disaster would also suffer from irrational fears.

TC Bob


----------



## I Simonius (Apr 19, 2011)

Just to say outright that birding and traveling are not good combos unless you are an athlete

General thoughts:
- IMO and experience the 70-200 2.8LIS (which I have) is miles ahead of the f4LIS (which I owned), in all respects (bokeh, IS and IQ).
- The 5D2 (which I have) is not that much better than the 5Dmk1 (which I had). Yes it has more MP and faster ISO, but _unless you are going to make huge prints and regularily use the high ISO_ you won't notice the dieffrence (If you want it for video , then that's another matter - I hardly ever use vid). I have looked back at some 5Dmk1 files recently and have been amazed at the file qaulity. _Properly exposed_ files have a huge DR and appear just as sharp. i.e. there's not that much in resolution difference _in practice_ unless you need big prints
- Wait for 5D3? Even if they announce it this afternoon, you'll not get one in your hand for3months earliest and it'll be at top price (i.e. £1000 more than you'll pay in 9 months time)


----------



## Selwin (Apr 21, 2011)

I Simonius said:


> Just to say outright that birding and traveling are not good combos unless you are an athlete


Well yes, you're right of course. I am not a birder myself, but I am travelling the world, looking for inspiration and taking pictures on the side. If I do find the occasional wildlife I want to take decent pictures without having to crop to 100% (which I must do regularly with my current kit). My travel bag weighs about 8-10 kg, depending on which lenses I bring.


> General thoughts:
> - IMO and experience the 70-200 2.8LIS (which I have) is miles ahead of the f4LIS (which I owned), in all respects (bokeh, IS and IQ).


Interesting. Which f/2.8 version do you actually have? mkI or mkII? When I got my f/4IS there was no mkII and tests showed the f/4IS, being of more recent date, is quite a bit sharper. The f/2.8mkII is just as sharp as my f/4IS, but has more contrast and of course better bokeh, provided you shoot is wide open.


> - The 5D2 (which I have) is not that much better than the 5Dmk1 (which I had). Yes it has more MP and faster ISO, but _unless you are going to make huge prints and regularily use the high ISO_ you won't notice the dieffrence


In my photography, high ISO is what it's all about. I shoot at 1600 regularly, often wishing to be able to shoot at 3200 and 6400. So yes, for me it matters. When I shoot at 3200, noise will often be the limiting factor. Sure I can get very clean 4x6 prints @3200 ISO, but I want to be able to print 12x18 without noise being very obvious.


> If you want it for video


No


> I have looked back at some 5Dmk1 files recently and have been amazed at the file qaulity. _Properly exposed_ files have a huge DR and appear just as sharp. i.e. there's not that much in resolution difference _in practice_ unless you need big prints


I will probably never need more than 10mp. But I want clean pixels. I would slap down $3000 for a 26.4mp 5DIII (that's the current rumour) if it gets me 10 million clean pixels as a final result.


> - Wait for 5D3? Even if they announce it this afternoon, you'll not get one in your hand for3months earliest and it'll be at top price (i.e. £1000 more than you'll pay in 9 months time)


I can wait.


----------



## Selwin (Apr 21, 2011)

rjalex said:


> Selwin took a quick glance at your post. I own both the 5Dmk2 and the 7D and personally find the IQ of the former so much better that the 7D lies in my bag only as a backup camera. I'm personally willing to have a less brilliant AF, slower burst rate but a better IQ. YMMV of course.


Could you be more specific about IQ? Is it contrast? Is it high ISO? Is it at normal viewing size or at 100% viewing? 



> Canon's Fusukshima plant produced only Canon's printers. The radiation levels at the plants where the lenses are produced is considered safe for people AND even though I am not a pysicist I would urge you to get a more authorititative opinion on what risks would an glass/metal object exposed to radiation pose to your health. It would be immensely sad if the economy of Japan after being hit by this immense disaster would also suffer from irrational fears.
> 
> TC Bob


Not to worry Bob. I emailed a dutch professor who is an expert and he says that glass/metal objects cannot pick up radiation, expecially not at 20-30 km distance. I am not worrying about that anymore.


----------



## I Simonius (Apr 24, 2011)

I have the MK2 version of the 70-200


----------



## Selwin (Apr 28, 2011)

I Simonius said:


> I have the MK2 version of the 70-200


 That's great! I am on the verge of ordering one for myself and try to get a good deal on a 1.4xTC (mkII, not mkIII). Some 70-200mkII owners report about softness @200mm wide open. How does your sample behave in that respect? One would hope there's little sample variation in this lens class, but who knows. 
Now that you are saying the 5DII isn't that much better than the 5Dclassic, you confirm the reasons I have been able to hold out so long with my 5D. Just can't justify spending the cash for a 5DII. So I can wait that little bit more until the 5DIII specs are announced. Then we'll see how it compares to a 5DII and i will make up my mind. It will either be a 5DIII or a 5DII for a very good deal, because I really want to have a second camera body.


----------



## rjalex (May 2, 2011)

Hi Selwin, good to have a confirmation on the non existance of dangers about buying lenses from Canon ! It would be sad if such a rumor spread.

I have not owned a 5D but a 350D, 20D, 40D , 7D and 5Dmk2. The latter two make my kit nowadays and use them for different purposes since 7D = speed (burst speed, AF speed) and 5D = Image Quality (IQ)  I am not sure if other than HD video capability, larger megapixel count, LCD, high ISO performance the quality if the 5Dmk2 is significantly better than it's prior incarnation. Some posts indicate yes, other no. 

I have seen photos of a friend with the 1.4x TC on the 70-200 on his 40D and a quick glance made me very happy (not any in depth test though).

TC
Bob


----------



## Selwin (Jun 5, 2011)

Hi everyone,
The 70-200/2.8mkII has arrived on my doorstep. Even though I rented it once and knowing what it can do for a wedding, seeing the first test shots blows me away. I must say I had to get used to carrying the weight again. Seeing the results tells me it's worth it. So much so, that I will sell both my 70-200/4IS and 135L.
Now let's hear what Canon has to say when they go and announce the 5D3...


----------



## I Simonius (Jun 25, 2011)

Selwin said:


> Hi everyone,
> The 70-200/2.8mkII has arrived on my doorstep. Even though I rented it once and knowing what it can do for a wedding, seeing the first test shots blows me away. I must say I had to get used to carrying the weight again. Seeing the results tells me it's worth it. So much so, that I will sell both my 70-200/4IS and 135L.
> Now let's hear what Canon has to say when they go and announce the 5D3...



told you!


----------



## daiseysprings (Jul 12, 2011)

I have the 5D (original) and use my 70-200/2.8 L IS II all the time, for everything!  That lens is amazing and worth the weight!  I shoot about 30 weddings a year as a second shooter.  My boss supplies all the equipment and he has the 5D mk2, which I shoot with regularly.  The higher ISO's are great for the weddings, but in comparing the IQ with those from my regular 5D there really isn't much difference.  I am awaiting the release of the Mark 3 as well  Another lens that is amazing is the 85mm 1.2!  Amazing lens for capturing moments in low light, however very slow to focus! The 16-35/2.8 is another great wide angle lens that comes in handy for weddings!  We also use the 50 1.2 A LOT!  

You said earlier that you are not a very good flash photographer, and for me the flash was difficult at first as well.  Just a tip, bounce the flash off walls.  I usually try to find something white where the light can bounce onto subjects face, or bounce from where light is already coming in on subject.  Once I learned to bounce I fell in love with light!  I'm now just beginning to understand off camera lighting now that I've recently purchased my second 580EXII!  It's challenging but I'm in love with the results!!  Best of luck to you and congrats on your new lens!


----------



## Selwin (Oct 7, 2013)

Hi Daisey,
it is with red cheeks  that I answer your post, more than two years later. Meanwhile I still don't shoot much with flash, but I did buy the 35L and the 50L. Together with the 70-200/2.8II and the 16-35II I'm all set for any wedding. I currently have two bodies, a 5D and 5DII. Your post made me want to explore flash photography more. One never knows when it might come in handy.
regards,
Selwin


----------

