Canon knows their stuff! They got a ridiculous amount of criticism when this lens came out - mostly from other brand's fanboys. But time after time, Canon innovates in details that matter to real photographers. Canon delivers value and quality.
I ' m using the Canon EF 70- 200 III USM with the 5 D MARK IV since september 2018 . The quality is really excellent . I take pictures on concerts , portraits , animals , nature and landscape . The sharpness of the images is amazing . I love this system .
I have the II version of this lens and I'll probably never get rid of it :) I'm using it on an EOS R since a few years, even with a Viltrox lens mount adapter, and it simply does a fantastic job every single time.
I own this lens, bought it right after it came out, and use it on my 7D2, on my EOS RP and until today on my R7. It makes a fantastic job every single time i use it. And I will use it far into future shootings. Biggest advantage over the newer RF versions... the internal zooming. Same as with my f/4 version of this lense...
If you use the foot/ring with a monopod it balances much better. You put added tension on your monopod because it is front heavy if you just attach to your camera. This can wear out the grip on the ball head faster as you’ll be tightening it down more frequently. If you always shoot handheld, it just gets in the way so it makes sense to remove it like Jared is suggesting, but with a monopod or tripod it’s pretty helpful
the Canon 70-200 2.8 has been a "best" of since its first incarnation. It's a super lens and has helped taking amazing images all over the world for decades.
No way in the world the EF glasses will be dead in a couple of years. There's to many dedicated video cameras that use the EF Mount (Canon obviously but so does Blackmagic, Panasonic, Kinefinity and even RED). There's also the fact that they still have a huge line of dedicated Cinema glass that are EF mounts. Maybe on the photography side, it may fade, but in terms of video? No Way.
James Jackson Films I don’t think the photography side will suffer too much either... heard about ten years ago m4/3’s is dead but the pure amount of glass means it’s still going strong.
@@chrischan5168 I don't think the photography side will go away either. I was just stating that I would see that side go before any of the video side for the EF mount. Regarding m43rds we shall see. Panasonic is one of the big reasons m43rds have done so well and with them moving to the Leica L mount for their full frame line up is reason for cause to pause. Unlike the Canon EF system, the M43rds is not heavily invested across so many different markets (i.e. cinema, full frame, crop sensor ect). It's one of the reasons I think Panasonic's full frame announcement to the Leica L is a terrible move. There's no consistency of dedicated glass on their various platforms, and they choice a mount whose current glass is very "luxurious" in terms of pricing. To make the full frame work they may have to move away from M43rds eventually because they don't have the range Canon and Sony have of mult-platforms.
I think everyone’s got to ask themselves what more could they get out of the newer lenses creatively. I have my collection of glass that I’ve built up over the past 15 years, I use it all and I’m very happy with the results. If new zoom pro glass aperture is set to f2.0 like that recent RF zoom then things might start changing rapidly.
Honestly even as a Sony fanboy, cannon did something amazing with drop in filters for the EOS R adapters. I would hope they keep making the EF lenses so that you can use the drop in filter adapter. It makes it super easy to use filters on all kinds of lenses including ultrawide bubble lenses
The 70-200mm f/2.8 focal length and aperture is the best choice for portrait photography. Also most of these lenses have internal focus, internal zoom and rubber mount gasket which makes them very robust against moisture and dust.
For the amount of money you could sell the II version for, it would absolutely make sense to do so and buy the III, the II "sharpness" is soft at best and 100% worth the upgrade to the III its freaky unreal sharpness and clarity. Even 3 years on from the release of this vid, if youve got a 5D mk 4 and a 70-200 III your still set for half a decade of quality shooting before you need to consider the move to mirrorless, and that gives the RF range time to settle, develop a second hand market and the prices will go down significantly once its the majority market.
The wind tunnel test makes me wonder, is it possible to design a more aerodynamic lens that will vibrate less when mounted to a tripod and doing landscapes that need more zoom?
I bought a version II back in January (my first L lens in 25 years of shooting with EOS cameras) and love it. I agree one lens coating change and different color paint isn't worth the cost for me to upgrade.
I used the pouch with my Nikon 70-200 VRII from time to time. I use the over the shoulder strap, not the belt loop. A friend of mine who has the Tamron 70-200 bought a Nikon pouch for his. If you are going light and carry one body and a 24-70 & 70-200 it works well. One lens on the body, the other over your shoulder in the pouch.
The f/4L IS is plenty good enough for a professional photographer. And is smaller and lighter, very sharp and portraits do look very good. It falls short in low light, obviously.
I have the Canon 70-200 F2.8 is (version 1) and its a great lens, one of my favorites and I have been hesitating on upgrading to the version III, but this vlog maybe a decision maker? especially after the wind test.
I am not a big fan of upgrading evertime a new version comes out, I rarely buy the latest version of anything and that helps u get killer deals on older versions imo. I just bought my first Sony A7ii because it was cheap used now version 3 is out, I'm still using a canon 5d classic and pictures are amazing, I thought about upgrading to 5d mark3 but think I will hold off another year or two when they really cheap, I get killer poster size images from the original 5d and that sensor captures a picture I font think the newer version can, but for pro users on payed weddings I understand the need for faster buffer rate and duel card slots ect, I don't understand non pro buying latest gear though lol
just bought this lens for my new LUMIX S5ii today. This IS a DREAM LENS for sure. The white screams pro! can't wait to do the wind tunnel test for myself
I'm a serious hobbyist and went from The Mark 1 to the mark 2 not too long ago. It was a huge upgrade. I seem to remember the mk2 being way more expensive than this version 3 but I honestly don't see a reason to upgrade from my current lens. I have a sharp copy of the Mk2- you never know what you're going to get......
You mention that the lens "still holds up well even at low ISO (8000)"... But what would ISO change how the lens performs? They're independent of eachother. Maybe you mean in low light situations, but I'm confused as to how a lens would work differently based on the amount of light... Maybe you'd seen less color or something? Is there any proof of that being a real 'thing'? Hard to explain what I'm getting at here.
If I may ask, have compared the 70-200 F2.8 L IS Version 3 to the Version 2 , especialyl when shooting against the light? If yes, what were the results? Also, if yes, is it true what I've heard from a couple of photographers who have tried both the Version 2 and Version 3 that the latter focuses a bit faster? Thanks.
The Nikon is the best built and the best perfroming 70-200f2.8, most of us are able to adapt to the fact that the focus and zoom rings have moved, I've been shooting Nikon for thirty years, I've owned five different 70-200s and I was able to use the new one perfectly well after just a few moments. Thankfuly my brain allows me to make adjustments to my behaviour depending on the gear I'm using at the time. Cheers Frono.
Have not heard anything about it, but is it even possible to adapt one of the newer RF lenses to an EF DSLR? Upgrading from Canon DSLR to all RF all the way, is going to be about the same price as switching to another brand altogether. Of course we can "adapt" EF lenses during the transition, but to go all mirrorless is pretty much like starting over. I don't see myself buying a Canon mirrorless until they relesse a more pro model (assuming they don't screw it up), but I fiind myself hesitating to buy any new EF lenses right now as the writing is on the wall.
Due to flange distance, you may not be able to use an RF lens on other cameras such as Sony, and they're also not backwards compatible to older Canon cameras. I still have adapters for M4/3, EF-M, as well as an old Canon EF film camera. Getting an adapter to go from EF lens to RF camera is trivial. If you want compact, get an iPhone.
Jared I've been been following your channel for years; since I was in 10th grade when I got into photography. I take pictures for friends and family and mainly as a hobby. I bought a D610 ever since you reviewed it. But recently I had my camera service and my Sigma 70-200 2.8 stopped auto focusing. I didn't have a second body to test it so I was heart broken thinking my 70-200 is broken. I was scrambling through the internet finding anything I can try and somewhere it told me to make sure my firmware was updated. I never updated the firmware before and somehow it was the latest version so I downgraded the firmware back to version 1.01 which solved the problem but is there something I'm missing that is causing this? Have you experienced this before?
Spec wise. There no difference between version 2 and version 3. I don't get why they even came out with a version 3. According to canons website they are the same lens. Jared of you read this. Do you have one for sale?
If there was a image comparison would be better. Also, what camera you own plays a big part too. If sony users need that canon ef mount that would add another 150-300+ depending which adapter you using and you don't always get the best performance from none native lens.
hi sir.. i am big fan of your videos and yours.. i love photograpy but i have no any high level lences.. but you are my inspiration and i learn with ur video ... thank u sir ..
Hi. I have a questions about why mk3 is better then Sony, except obvious - price? There is no canon mirrorless superspeed canon camera yet, and I don't want to switch yet, but I have the chance to buy 70-200 sony in very good price - is there any sense to me, or you in that movement if I am not pro. Ok I am thinking that I answered for second question already.
I still use a 5D Mark II and all L Series Lenses but do I go to an R5 or a 5D Mark IV? I know there will not be a Mark V but.... Replacing all my lenses will be like 7K
nice vid, however, the holy grail for sports shooters? I am a sports shooters, if I could only take one lens it would be a 400mm f2.8. not everyone next to you will have a 400mm but everyone WILL have a 70-200mm ... meaning your shots won't stand out from the crowd. ok ok fine maybe for outdoor sports.
Will be getting the 70-200mm f/2.8 III for my EOS R very soon but will also use it on my Canon T6s some. If I buy a used version, should I still do the sniff test? 🤔
@@Noksus to me those will be just numbers without context as I cannot see them side by side in video format that Is why I was asking .I can google all I want but if so ,then why watch video .Video can sometimes provide context that numbers on there own can not provide
All the 70-200 F/2.8s are about 3 to 3.5 lbs. If weight is a factor, get the F/4 which is half the weight and $800 cheaper. If you want the F/2.8, you must accept the weight.
Aaron Webb actually, yeah. Serious photographers often do consider weight. That's exactly why I bought the Canon 70-200 F/4L instead of the F/2.8L. If I'm going to trail hike for miles with a full-frame body, maybe a second body, several lenses, filters, a tripod, and assorted accessories in my backpack, it makes sense to save weight where you can. Especially if I don't need F/2.8 for landscape photography. Thomas Heaton has that same lens for the same reason. He BTW is a rock climber, and I'm a bodybuilder; so it was for practical considerations, not our "weak little arms".
So, remove the mount, eh? I hope you're not one of those folks that carry your camera by the body with this lens on! Covering sports, both the ring and the carry case are essential. One of the primary reasons for leaving the tripod ring mounted for me is convenience when swapping lenses. Since that foot's on the bottom, you don't need to look at what you're doing; muscle memory.
