70 - 200 Pop Quiz

[dmm96452]

You had planned to buy the Sigma 70-200 EX, DG, HSM in March but you realized that you can actually squeeze the Canon 70-200f2.8L (non-IS model) out of the budget. Further math revealed that if you wait until April you can swing the IS model.

You don't (so far) shoot sporting events or anything with a lot of action.

You do like to shoot with available light as much as possible.

You do like things to be as sharp as possible because you like to have prints of 16x24 or larger made from the better shots you take with your 20D.

You intend to be the best amateur photographer you can be and maybe even sell some of your better shots from time to time, but you don't intend to make a living from photography.

What do you do?

WHAT-DO-YOU-DO?

[ekstasis16]

If I had the money for it now, I pick up the Canon 2.8 IS version, hands down, no contest, game over. There's a reason that every single pro I've ever seen has had this lens. Quality, quality, quality. I'm sure the Sigma is fine, but the occasional horror story about compatibility problems scares me away. If I ever have a choice between a Canon and another brand, its the Canon every time (probably because I'm superstitious about it).

[Stephen Lutz]

I have the 70-200 2.8L and it is a great lens for some applications. Sports, portraits and events like fashion shows (with flash). Prior to this lens, I had the 80-200 2.8L (first generation, non-USM). This is also a great lens optically, and very responsive for a micro-motor lens. I have shot sports with the 80-200 2.8L and never had issues with the focus not being fast enough. If you can find one, it will be cheaper than the USM version, and optically just as good. Here is a shot I did with an EOS 3 and 80-200 2.8L @ 80mm, with Sensia 100 slide film back in the days before I went digital. Slides are wonderful, by the way.

[JSPhoto]

Well dmm, I think you answered your own question.

As for me, for years I used the Sigma, a very good lens but not exactly the best for a Canon. It's other shortcoming is the lack of IS. The IS is worth the extra $$. Back in October when I bought my MKII N I decided enough was enough and also bought the 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 USM IS and 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM. It wa the best purchase I have ever made. The 70-200 is bulletproof, and it doesn't care about the weather either. The latter won't really matter though with the 20D as it can't take the weather the way the lens can. It's the best all round lens you can get though. Some even use it for portraits too.

JS

[drg]

Buy the IS version.

I have had all three of these lens in the EOS mount and if you can buy any one of the three, buy the IS version of the L 2.8. One thing to add to your arsenal is a good monopod or tripod if you don't have one. Even with IS you'll find for the casual(not an everyday) shooter it can make a huge difference. The 70-200 as mentioned is a great lens and a standard. There are reasons for the others, and not just cost, but for one lens this is the one.

[Sebastian]

Don't get the IS. It adds little utility for the extra 500 bucks, and it's failure prone. If I was doing it over again I would get the non-IS hands down.

[SmartWombat]

I like that IS so much that I bought two !

On the other hand, I did drop one and it's finally failed 6 months later.
Not the IS, but the diaphragm doesn't stop down reliably.
It's going in to Canon for repair as soon as my priority stickers arrive.

[dmm96452]

Thanks for all of the input. So far it's looking like I'm going to save up, but since this post is getting so many responses I'm going to collect opinions for a while longer before making a final decision.

Don't get the IS. It adds little utility for the extra 500 bucks, and it's failure prone. If I was doing it over again I would get the non-IS hands down.

Sebastian - So far you're the only one with anything bad to say about the lens (other then price) do you think you just had a bad copy?

[Sebastian]

There's nothing wrong with mine, except for the occassional 00 aperture readout or the ERR99, both often caused by a locked-up IS unit. They lock up more than they should, and eventually they fail. It's a $600 part to replace. I should have stuck with a $50 monopod, works better and cheaper to replace.

Sure, the lens is nice, but the IS is not nearly useful enough to justify the price difference IMO.

[drg]

What do you people do to your equipment;) ? Just kidding Sebastian.

L lens are tough but not admittedly indestructable. One sure fire way it seems to burn out the gyros is to use the lens in the wrong mode and move through the wrong axis repeatedly.

I'm recommending the IS version of the lens as it should help the occasional/weekend photographer take better photos more reliably. Personally I don't like a couple of things with the 70-200 IS including they bother my eye part of the time when tracking freehand. I've never noticed it when on a tripod/mono. I've used it more for low light recently than anything else though I've used it extensively in the past for horse shows.

It might be good to try out the lens at your favorite vendor or try someone else's for an hour or so. Some people are very put off by the sounds and how they generally work. Its easier to not use the IS than to not have it to get that one time photo.

[Sebastian]

One sure fire way it seems to burn out the gyros is to use the lens in the wrong mode and move through the wrong axis repeatedly.

There is no "wrong" axis, and there are no gyros. The lenses use tiny solid-state velocity sensors, and the common point of failure appears to be in the finely machined plastic parts in the housing. I found an article once that described the procedure for repairing the IS unit, even going as far as machining their own replacement parts out of metal. I will try to see if I can dig it up.

As for the axis, the motor compensates for motion differently based on the switch position, the only thing that happens is that if you have it set improperly the IS will simply be much less effective. To think that moving the lens "in the wrong axis" is to assume that the lens expects motion in a certain direction, but since these lenses are meant to be used vertically or horizontally, that just makes no sense whatsoever. If that was the case, you'd have vertical/horizontal switches in addition to the two mode switches already present. The way it seems to work is that it senses motion and tries to compensate for it based on your selection of Mode 1 or Mode 2.

As for what I do with my equipment, I use it to drive nails into crates for my shipping business. Why, what else are these heavy lenses good for? ;)

[EDIT]That didn't take long, here's the write-up on the failure and replacement. I was wrong, new parts are carbon fiber, not metal: http://home.fuse.net/pets/EOS/70-200/70-200.htm[/EDIT]

[dmm96452]

...I should have stuck with a $50 monopod, works better and cheaper to replace.

Sure, the lens is nice, but the IS is not nearly useful enough to justify the price difference IMO.

Noted and logged. Thanks.

[drg]

There is no "wrong" axis, and there are no gyros. The lenses use tiny solid-state velocity sensors, . . .

As for the axis, the motor compensates for motion differently based on the switch position, the only thing that happens is that if you have it set improperly the IS will simply be much less effective. To think that moving the lens "in the wrong axis" is to assume that the lens expects motion in a certain direction, but since these lenses are meant to be used vertically or horizontally, that just makes no sense whatsoever. If that was the case, you'd have vertical/horizontal switches in addition to the two mode switches already present. The way it seems to work is that it senses motion and tries to compensate for it based on your selection of Mode 1 or Mode 2.

Actually there are gyros or certainly "linear accelerometers deployed in an equivalent spatial orientation". I give you the quote from a Canon Tech Doc:

"Automatic tripod detection and malfunction prevention
The EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM incorporates the same automatic tripod detection function that is used with Canon’s super-telephoto IS lenses. Output signals from the vibration gyro are analyzed to determine if the lens is hand-held or mounted on a tripod. When the image stabilizer function is turned on and the lens detects that a tripod is in use, the shift lens is electronically centered and locked on the optical axis, preventing improper operation."

You can find this at:

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/t...09/report.html

The motor motion that compensates for the shake, rattle, and roll is separate from detection admittedly unlike direct compensation of a gyro "stabilized" device.

However, stabilization of the direct nature went out years ago. Steadicam was about the last to use a direct gyroscopic principle and they even went to a multi gimbaled environment partially to prevent the things from flipping themselve 180degrees upside down or backwards. The gyros I am referring to are the admittedly rather fragile pieces that don't have to rotate perpindicular to the axis of correction but can move along the axis of "shake" and the microprocessor can analyze the relative distance traveled to produce a model of rotation that can then instruct the motor as to correction info. I can make one of these jam very effectively by just swinging it in a certain way while have AF locked on something. Try it in a boat where the camera and lens is moving around multiple axis and/or complex yaw. First time it happened was not too far off the Burnham Harbor entrance in a 30 footer in only about two-three feet of sea. Just turned it off and it came back, but as the day progressed it kept happening.

It is a subtle tool in some ways and I've found that it helps in really windy conditions of all things. That and tracking relatively slow moving targets or at least the lens is moving relatively slowly. Sure, if I take the lens and snap it across a basketball court and don't have that .25-.5 seconds it will seriously play tricks (I can see it in the viewfinder and personally it is annoying as all *&^$^). The two modes optimize along a curve the relative correction algorithm for motor motion the displacement of the moving lens element(s).

Another interesting excerpt from the Canon Doc:

"The EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM adopted a new type of compact, lightweight, high-performance vibration gyro and improved signal processing circuits to start image stabilizer operation within about 0.5 seconds after pressing the shutter button halfway (previous models took about one second), allowing the user to capture the decisive moments without blurring the image." (added emphasis mine)

[Sebastian]

Amazing, I spent months looking for something like that document like that before purchasing the lens, and never was able to dig it up. THAT got bookmarked.

Thank you, I sit corrected!

[Lionheart]

Not really a contest if finances aren't a real issue. Get the IS version if cost is a non factor since it does come in handy. However, although the IS is nice, I find it rarely necessary. I shoot with it off most of the time on mine. With virtually noiseless images on Canon Digital cameras at ISO 800, I really don't need the IS as much as I thought. The bugabear of the IS feature is it drains battery juice, plus it occasionally goes bad and needs replacement IS modules if you put your gear through the paces daily like I do. If I still had my original 70-200 f2.8L (got stolen), I probably would still be using it in lieu of the IS version. Just my two bits of course.

[Norfindel]

One thing i never understood about IS is why it must be disabled when shooting on a tripod. One would assume that if no camera shake occurs, the IS element won't move at all, and will remain centered.

[Stephen Lutz]

In first generation IS lenses, the sensors were designed to assume their would be movement, and would cause the lens elements to drift erratically if there was no movement for them to compensate for. More modern IS lenses can sense when they are on a tripod and lock the lens elements in place, thus no "drift."

[PhotoMommy]

I've been shooting the non-IS for a year and a half and I'm real happy with it. I have to add that I shoot in fairly extreme conditions (ie inside rodeo arenas or on the side of a mountain for mountain biking). Needless to say, I'm either in very awkward positions or on the run, and I don't use a monopod. The non-IS has never let me down. I would have to question whether or not the IS is worth the extra bucks.

Jody

[dmm96452]

Thanks for all of the input from everyone. I believe that I'm going to go with the IS version. I spend enough time shooting in low light and adverse conditions that I believe I will put the IS to good use when I get it.

I've also made a small change in plans. I'm going to get the 24-105 f/4L IS first. It is a range I use more often then 70-200.