I use the 70-200 L F4 IS II for landscape photography. It's perfect for this kind of use. Most of my shots are at F11, seldomly F5,6. Before, i had the 2.8 Mark II of the 70-200 series. It was also very good, but it was heavy and bulky in the backpack. The F4 is just as sharp, much lighter, has much better IS for the handheld shots on walks with the family. And 2.8 is not really fast anyway. I consider a F1,4 prime fast, not a zooming F2,8 lens. So F4 is for walks and landscapes, for indoor stuff i use a 35 1,4 and a 85 1.4. Also changed my 24-70 L ii for the 24-70 L IS F4 and don't regret this either. Now my zooms are small and light (in fullframe terms) and have good IS, and for low light an indoor photography, i use primes. Also check out lensrentals teardown of this awesome lens!
Christopher, you should consider a career as an Audiobook narrator. You have a very pleasant and calming voice. Oh, and thanks for another great lens review.
Hey Chris, have you ever considered re-testing the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 on the M6 Mark II? I wonder whether it will be able to stand up to that demanding 32MP sensor.
I was able to buy this lens last christmas used/refurbished for 650€. I'm still very happy with the purchase, the only thing I regret is to not be able to spend more time with the lens. I used it on a crop sensor by the way, but I decided to get this lens anyways as an investment in the future, when I will purchase a better body. Very nice review of the lens, which made me happy with my choice last year. :)
IS noise is MUCH improved over previous edition - IS performance a little better too, and slightly sharper. I decided it was worth the price premium - about $350 difference comparing mint used copies. My Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 is still the better lens, but this one, at half the weight, is a constant companion on backpacking trips. Cheers Chris and thanks!
I own tge 70-200 f2.8 mkii (used, im not rich :-) ) and i love it - especially for landscape at lower light levels - but its a chunky piece of glasstube... and if i go on a hike i much prefer my 70-300 f4-5.6 , its much lighter and as a bonus, has more range. As long as i dont intend to do low light handholding its fine.
same for me with the f/4 lens he tested. I use a tripod and don't tend to use it for close subjects so unless it's blowing a gale the f4 does what I need it to for landscapes without the extra weight. In retrospect perhaps I should have gone for the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 but it was quite a bit more money even as a grey import. I didn't think about the 70-300mm you have at the time but maybe I should have as Grey price is similar.
I thank you again Chris. For us "mere mortals", who broke bank to get a new camera, it is such a relief that you have reviews on older lenses available on second hand market. Do you actually have all these old lenses lying around in your basement somewhere? I would love to see a group review of old lenses on new cameras. I should be so happy, get drunk and sponsor your patreon at the top-most amount until my hangover is over.
Bought this lens last year. It’s awesome. Very sharp and nice bokeh i.c. with the Canon 6 D mark II.. It weighs half of an F2.8 lens. And for landscape photography an F4 is fine.
@christopher can I ask for your advice please. I do a lot of flying so taking aerial photos and also aviation photography of other aircraft. I have a Canon R7....any recommendations please ?
hi cris ! gratz on your great work, im getting a bmpc6kpro , i was wondering if this lens will do the work for sport photography like wakeboarding or kiteboarding
Your review on the mark 1, you very highly recommended it. And you said the flaring wasn’t really bad. But when you mentioned the mark 1 here you sounded different. You said here there the flaring on mark 1 was “pretty terrible.” Im confused Chris.
Can you please tell me if there is a noticeable difference between this and the non-IS version in terms of image quality? Some say there is, some say it's so minor it doesn't really matter in case you don't want the IS. Thank you!
The Mark I was an excellent choice, never aged, one of there very most solid options in Canon's lineup. Mark II will not get the same success due to mirrorless is eating up the market. This Mark II is excellent on an EOS R as well, gust the R 70-200 2.8 is just as portable (!!!) We will see what kind of lens Canon will provide to put the adequate answer to the mirrorless market, I am looking forward.
Hi Chris, I really like your reviews. I have an M6 Mk2 and I seriously considered the 70-200 f4, but opted for the 55-250 ef-s after seeing your stellar review of it. I’m glad I went with the 55-250 as the M6 seems to be just as brutal to the L glass. I can see the 55-250 is softish at the long end, but I’m interested in your thoughts. Do you still have your 55-250 and could you review it on your M6? I’m interested to see how close it is to the 70-200 f4. Cheers and look forward to more of your adapted reviews.
Late reply, but I was in a similar position as you. Got the m6ii and heard raving reviews about the 55-250 stm, so I thought it’s a nobrainer as I am also not that interested in a bright aperture (landscape photography). The 55-250 was soft as fuck for me, I was honestly shocked, I guess the expectations have to match the price somehow.. Anyways, I got a 70-200 f4 L IS Mark 1, and it honestly is a difference of night and day. If you can get it for under 400$ it is a steal.
I just got my lens and it makes a sudden sound whenever the IS motor is engaged and when it stops - on mode one. Is this normal? I've seen some people say it's normal and others say that it goes away after a while. The sound is slightly less loud when compared to the shutter itself. I heard the sound somewhere around 3:34 on this video, right as he started focusing
I bought this lens as a grey import for approx £900 (I did my research on reputable companies) and initially paired it with my Canon 80D where it seemed to work well. I've since changed that for an Eos R and it seems to be even better. As I primarily shoot landscapes I see no reason to go for the f2.8 version due to expense and weight. I guess if I had enough spare cash I would but by the time you add another lens or 2 plus body and accessories for me the weight/cost wasn't worth it. For £900 incl. a reputable company warranty I think it's well worth the price.
Always a good review! I had a 70-200 f4 mark 1, without IS, and swap it for a 85mm 1.8 - loved it, te bokeh, portrait... Kinda miss the 200mm for bird photo, but I been using the camera for portraits, maybe some day i will go for a 70-200 2.8 or maybe a 300mm, but i'm not sure if I want to carry a big white lense around.
It would be so great if you could review the Tokina Opera 16-28mm f/2.8 FF other reviews don't give me those clues that yours do. I'm arguing with myself whether I should save up for this or for the Irix 15mm F2.4. Great work with your videos!
Hi, unrelated to this great review. do you think canon will launch a 6D III in the coming years? Something like that could fit my requirements in terms of pricing and performance and I'm looking for thoughts on the matter.
Chris, as I thought had originally commented, were price not an issue, would certainly have purchased the 70-200 2.8. Fwiw, have the 24-70 L 2.8. On my 6D most of the time. Superb bokeh and IQ. Sometimes use Canon 85 1.8 prime.
Owning a Canon 6D ,now for some years ( and not tempted to go mirrorless), purchased the first IS version of this lens. Naturally, was tempted by the faster 2.8 version, however the price of that lens would require the sale of a body part! Have been very pleased with autofocus speed and IQ. Am not sure why you would never consider the purchase of a lens with focal length. For what I do, when need some legs, subject isolation,it is a great choice. Perhaps you may care to comment as to why you no longer find favour with this focal length given that you apparently owned a copy of the first iteration? Cleary the market is far more competitive now. The rival offerings from Sigma and the very effective VR offering from Tamron would make choice more difficult. Nevertheless, I have not found the lack of IS to be a limiting factor. Also, price aside , the 2.8 version is both significantly heavier and way more expensive. Purchasers of this lens, given your review will have an excellent piece of L glass for life.
Your new uploads frustrate me since I had purchased M6mark2 months ago. 😳 What would be the most suitable lens for M6mark2? What is the use of having such high numbers of pixels if it can not make clear images even with the canon ' L ’ lens?
It's still an improvement over a 24mp sensor - in some places the 15-45mm kit lens can just about resolve 32mp (in the middle of its image anyway!). The Canon 32mm f/1.4 is able to resolve it, too. I know what you mean, though - it's easily the most challenging sensor for lenses that I've ever used
Hi Chris, thanks for this review! I own the predecessor and am very happy with it. Nice that you can use those lenses via adapter on the Nikon Z cameras as well, a nice thing! Best wishes from Germany, Magnetron
How many of your followers have so many megapixels? Camera's with 24 mp or 30 are more common. How do I know what is best value for money for my middle of the road camera?
Plenty of people use cameras in the 40mp range - they've been available for years. But the good thing about testing at 42mp is that, if you own a 24mp camera, you'll get a good idea of the image quality from these very test charts - just imagine them a bit sharper :-)
This is something l would love to know too. I have the canon 100-400 mark ii and the canon 90d. Would like to know how the 70-200 f4 ii fairs against that on such a high demand sensor.
@@christopherfrost im planning to get this or the tamron g2 version of it, wich one would you recomend me (im on canon 80D, might upgrade to a r6 in the future )
Hey great video, I just have a question. I have the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II USM (The one with nano USM motor) and I’ve used it for around 3 years. I’m quite happy with my lens, however its sharpness is just about average, and I tend to crop in a lot in my photos. I was wondering if getting this lens would actually yield me much sharper images. Some people even said that this 70-200 lens at 200mm cropped to 300mm equivalent, is actually sharper than 70-300mm at 300mm without any cropping, I’d like to hear your opinions about whether to keep my 70-300 or sell it and get a new 70-200 f4 IS II USM lens. Thanks in advance!
going from 24mp to 32mp, sensor becomes demanding and start giving shitty resolution for all lenses, while point of going from 24mp to 32mp was to give more resolution. Its a catch-22
I have one because they are so compact, light and versatile. That and a 24-70mm 2.8L is all you need for travel. You need the 2.8 one of those because you'll use them indoors and at night a lot of the time. The 70-200 is an outdoor day time lens. Does everything from portraits to action. 4 is more than fast enough in daylight.
@@thunder7382 that's great for you personally but this is R&D they could have put into RF lenses which are the future. There's already amazing EF lenses for everything, some of their best have been out for many years! It just makes no sense to me why they did the work on this at this point in time
Did you know: there’s also a very nice FD version, the nFD 4.0/80-200mm L. It isn’t image stabilized because it is from 1985. But its image quality is stunning, too. It can be had for a fraction of the price of this lens in mint used condition.
Before I buy a lens, I ask myself "I wonder what Christopher has to say about this lens?". You never disappoint, man. Keep up the great work.
No Canon 70-200 2.8 is III review 🥺. Thanks Chris, your reviews helps a lot to make informed decisions in the purchase moments
Love this lens. I actually sold my 2.8 for this one because for my purposes it's just as sharp and way more portable on long hikes.
Brian Beatty the weight difference is insane.
U mean F4 is sharper than F2.8 ?
@@vinaychinapanjwani2060 "just as" =/= sharper. I'd say they're roughly the same for the apertures I use.
@@brianbeattyphotography tks, bht this lens have softness issue on 32.50mp apsc sensor, 90D camera use this lens pic very soft
FINALLY, I’ve been trying to figure out the difference between IS mode 1 & 2. Mode 2 gives you the ability to pan more smoothly. THANK YOU
I use the 70-200 L F4 IS II for landscape photography. It's perfect for this kind of use. Most of my shots are at F11, seldomly F5,6. Before, i had the 2.8 Mark II of the 70-200 series. It was also very good, but it was heavy and bulky in the backpack. The F4 is just as sharp, much lighter, has much better IS for the handheld shots on walks with the family. And 2.8 is not really fast anyway. I consider a F1,4 prime fast, not a zooming F2,8 lens. So F4 is for walks and landscapes, for indoor stuff i use a 35 1,4 and a 85 1.4. Also changed my 24-70 L ii for the 24-70 L IS F4 and don't regret this either. Now my zooms are small and light (in fullframe terms) and have good IS, and for low light an indoor photography, i use primes. Also check out lensrentals teardown of this awesome lens!
Just read the teardown and yes, it's very positive.
Christopher, you should consider a career as an Audiobook narrator. You have a very pleasant and calming voice. Oh, and thanks for another great lens review.
He is following his passion instead of what he could do
I’ve watched your reviews before buying every single camera lens I’ve got. Thank you for your detailed and straight forward reviews!
Hey Chris, have you ever considered re-testing the Sigma 50-100 f1.8 on the M6 Mark II? I wonder whether it will be able to stand up to that demanding 32MP sensor.
Or the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8! Please
I was able to buy this lens last christmas used/refurbished for 650€. I'm still very happy with the purchase, the only thing I regret is to not be able to spend more time with the lens. I used it on a crop sensor by the way, but I decided to get this lens anyways as an investment in the future, when I will purchase a better body. Very nice review of the lens, which made me happy with my choice last year. :)
I still dream of owning one of these some day. I have the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 II IS L USM Lens for now, and it does pretty good.
IS noise is MUCH improved over previous edition - IS performance a little better too, and slightly sharper. I decided it was worth the price premium - about $350 difference comparing mint used copies. My Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 is still the better lens, but this one, at half the weight, is a constant companion on backpacking trips. Cheers Chris and thanks!
Hi Chris, great review, thanks a lot! Why you're not testing the Canon lenses on your EOS R?
Resolution. I'd rather test at 42mp than 30mp
I own tge 70-200 f2.8 mkii (used, im not rich :-) ) and i love it - especially for landscape at lower light levels - but its a chunky piece of glasstube... and if i go on a hike i much prefer my 70-300 f4-5.6 , its much lighter and as a bonus, has more range. As long as i dont intend to do low light handholding its fine.
same for me with the f/4 lens he tested. I use a tripod and don't tend to use it for close subjects so unless it's blowing a gale the f4 does what I need it to for landscapes without the extra weight. In retrospect perhaps I should have gone for the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 but it was quite a bit more money even as a grey import. I didn't think about the 70-300mm you have at the time but maybe I should have as Grey price is similar.
Why not use Canon EOS R for testing?
Yes, I was thinking of getting the M6 but these videos has changed my mind. Full frame is less demanding for the lenses.
Resolution. I'd rather test at 42mp than 30mp
I thank you again Chris. For us "mere mortals", who broke bank to get a new camera, it is such a relief that you have reviews on older lenses available on second hand market. Do you actually have all these old lenses lying around in your basement somewhere? I would love to see a group review of old lenses on new cameras. I should be so happy, get drunk and sponsor your patreon at the top-most amount until my hangover is over.
Thanks again for your thorough and consistent reviews. Much appreciated
Bought this lens last year. It’s awesome. Very sharp and nice bokeh i.c. with the Canon 6 D mark II.. It weighs half of an F2.8 lens. And for landscape photography an F4 is fine.
I really want to see you do a test of Canon 70 200mm f2.8 mark ii and mark iii.
I love this lens. Easily the best and most expensive lens I own. Works great on EOS R.
I bought this lens last year. I like it. Its much quicker than the last on. Great pics.
I wonder if there's a way for camera manufacturers to instal a weather gasket on the camera body.
Someone please hire this guy
I not sure if is weather gasket but the Canon 7D mark II and 1DX mark II have something made in rubber around the mount
Thank you for not abandoning the worthy band of Canon DSLR users
Thanks alot. what distances you used to take the shots to test sharpness in different zooms and Fs?
Great job Chris. Maybe you can test the Sigma 135mm f1. 8 on the M6II, very interested in the result as im looking into one for my 90D.👍🏻
Noticeable barrel distortion .... you seem to be very sensitive
@christopher can I ask for your advice please. I do a lot of flying so taking aerial photos and also aviation photography of other aircraft. I have a Canon R7....any recommendations please ?
hi cris ! gratz on your great work, im getting a bmpc6kpro , i was wondering if this lens will do the work for sport photography like wakeboarding or kiteboarding
Your review on the mark 1, you very highly recommended it. And you said the flaring wasn’t really bad. But when you mentioned the mark 1 here you sounded different. You said here there the flaring on mark 1 was “pretty terrible.” Im confused Chris.
Hey Chris I think it is the only lens I've heard you talking stays sharp at f/22 with no effect of diffraction.
@ 6:39 its 130mm not 135mm..its very very small mistake but you know your word very important to us..thanks for your hard work
i own this lens. i absolutely love it. i had all the versions that came before it but this lens outdoes them all.
Can you please tell me if there is a noticeable difference between this and the non-IS version in terms of image quality? Some say there is, some say it's so minor it doesn't really matter in case you don't want the IS. Thank you!
The Mark I was an excellent choice, never aged, one of there very most solid options in Canon's lineup.
Mark II will not get the same success due to mirrorless is eating up the market.
This Mark II is excellent on an EOS R as well, gust the R 70-200 2.8 is just as portable (!!!)
We will see what kind of lens Canon will provide to put the adequate answer to the mirrorless market, I am looking forward.
Uh, that rolling shutter at 2:00 minuter when panning was brutal. What body was used?
I can't remember, sorry!
Lovely review as usual. It would be nice though you mention the price in euro as well.
Hi Chris, I really like your reviews. I have an M6 Mk2 and I seriously considered the 70-200 f4, but opted for the 55-250 ef-s after seeing your stellar review of it. I’m glad I went with the 55-250 as the M6 seems to be just as brutal to the L glass. I can see the 55-250 is softish at the long end, but I’m interested in your thoughts. Do you still have your 55-250 and could you review it on your M6? I’m interested to see how close it is to the 70-200 f4. Cheers and look forward to more of your adapted reviews.
Late reply, but I was in a similar position as you.
Got the m6ii and heard raving reviews about the 55-250 stm, so I thought it’s a nobrainer as I am also not that interested in a bright aperture (landscape photography).
The 55-250 was soft as fuck for me, I was honestly shocked, I guess the expectations have to match the price somehow..
Anyways, I got a 70-200 f4 L IS Mark 1, and it honestly is a difference of night and day.
If you can get it for under 400$ it is a steal.
I just got my lens and it makes a sudden sound whenever the IS motor is engaged and when it stops - on mode one. Is this normal? I've seen some people say it's normal and others say that it goes away after a while. The sound is slightly less loud when compared to the shutter itself.
I heard the sound somewhere around 3:34 on this video, right as he started focusing
I bought this lens as a grey import for approx £900 (I did my research on reputable companies) and initially paired it with my Canon 80D where it seemed to work well. I've since changed that for an Eos R and it seems to be even better. As I primarily shoot landscapes I see no reason to go for the f2.8 version due to expense and weight. I guess if I had enough spare cash I would but by the time you add another lens or 2 plus body and accessories for me the weight/cost wasn't worth it. For £900 incl. a reputable company warranty I think it's well worth the price.
You mean to say on 90D this lens will not give sharp result ? As 32.5 mgpixel sensor giving soft pictures
Always a good review!
I had a 70-200 f4 mark 1, without IS, and swap it for a 85mm 1.8 - loved it, te bokeh, portrait...
Kinda miss the 200mm for bird photo, but I been using the camera for portraits, maybe some day i will go for a 70-200 2.8 or maybe a 300mm, but i'm not sure if I want to carry a big white lense around.
How is it on a 6d?
Hi is 32mp on APSC as demanding as 36mp on full frame? Is there a rule of thumb? Tks
It would be so great if you could review the Tokina Opera 16-28mm f/2.8 FF other reviews don't give me those clues that yours do. I'm arguing with myself whether I should save up for this or for the Irix 15mm F2.4. Great work with your videos!
At 1:58 i hear a click sound of images stabilizer turn on and the sound of the system' Christ.
Christopher, do not test Canon lenses on Sony mirrorless. Sony has much thicker filter stack, that ruins the image quality in the corners.
agree
So, it's not recommended for use with M6 Mark ii?
Thanks to your reviews I need another set of shelves... for all my lenses! 😂
God bless... 👍🏻
Is it sharp with canon 90d ?
Which adapter did u use on a7ii ?
Sigma
Hi, unrelated to this great review. do you think canon will launch a 6D III in the coming years? Something like that could fit my requirements in terms of pricing and performance and I'm looking for thoughts on the matter.
I don't think so. They'll be focussing on mirrorless cameras now
Chris, as I thought had originally commented, were price not an issue, would certainly have purchased the 70-200 2.8.
Fwiw, have the 24-70 L 2.8. On my 6D most of the time. Superb bokeh and IQ. Sometimes use Canon 85 1.8 prime.
It's parfocal lens or not?
Hello Christopher
Could you make comparison between this lens and the non-is ?
I've heard they are as sharp. Could it be true ?
Nope. This new lens is sharper
The fastest click of the west... as usual. As usual, great video :D
I really need afp 70-300mm kit lens o nikon review
It'd be great if you would do a review of the Canon RF 85mm f/2 macro IS STM lens. It's listed at$599 USD. Thanks.
Owning a Canon 6D ,now for some years ( and not tempted to go mirrorless), purchased the first IS version of this lens.
Naturally, was tempted by the faster 2.8 version, however the price of that lens would require the sale of a body part!
Have been very pleased with autofocus speed and IQ.
Am not sure why you would never consider the purchase of a lens with focal length. For what I do, when need some legs, subject isolation,it is a great choice.
Perhaps you may care to comment as to why you no longer find favour with this focal length given that you apparently owned a copy of the first iteration?
Cleary the market is far more competitive now. The rival offerings from Sigma and the very effective VR offering from Tamron would make choice more difficult.
Nevertheless, I have not found the lack of IS to be a limiting factor. Also, price aside , the 2.8 version is both significantly heavier and way more expensive.
Purchasers of this lens, given your review will have an excellent piece of L glass for life.
As I said in the video, it's not the focal length - I just prefer a lens with a brighter aperture than f/4
Your new uploads frustrate me since I had purchased M6mark2 months ago. 😳
What would be the most suitable lens for M6mark2?
What is the use of having such high numbers of pixels if it can not make clear images even with the canon ' L ’ lens?
It's still an improvement over a 24mp sensor - in some places the 15-45mm kit lens can just about resolve 32mp (in the middle of its image anyway!). The Canon 32mm f/1.4 is able to resolve it, too. I know what you mean, though - it's easily the most challenging sensor for lenses that I've ever used
How come the image quality is affected when used with the M6 + adapter. Can anyone give an optical/mechanical explanation. Thanks in adavance!
The sensor on the M6 Mark ii is far more demanding - it's so small and high resolution
I miss that good ol' brick building
Does any one know if it performs well on a canon 90d? I bought the version 1 is and it was giving soft results. Will this be any better?
make a vid of the sony version!
Hi Chris, thanks for this review! I own the predecessor and am very happy with it. Nice that you can use those lenses via adapter on the Nikon Z cameras as well, a nice thing! Best wishes from Germany, Magnetron
Awww--I can't take it in the bath with me :(
At least I can play with the zoom ring :)
🤣🤣🤣
Is it me or the front element looks small
Great stuff!
How many of your followers have so many megapixels? Camera's with 24 mp or 30 are more common. How do I know what is best value for money for my middle of the road camera?
Plenty of people use cameras in the 40mp range - they've been available for years. But the good thing about testing at 42mp is that, if you own a 24mp camera, you'll get a good idea of the image quality from these very test charts - just imagine them a bit sharper :-)
wow the rf 70-200 f4 is coming
How is the image quality compared to 70-300L or 100-400 L on a apsc body？
This is something l would love to know too. I have the canon 100-400 mark ii and the canon 90d. Would like to know how the 70-200 f4 ii fairs against that on such a high demand sensor.
It's such a sexy lens! I want it but my wallet cries every time I look at one
So it would look better on eos M50.....?
It will look great, yes
nice video mate, the sensor dust was very....very hard to watch lol, good times!
I know, very embarrassing! I've cleaned it now hehe
@@christopherfrost im planning to get this or the tamron g2 version of it, wich one would you recomend me (im on canon 80D, might upgrade to a r6 in the future )
@@xodius80 Well this Canon version is certainly a little better but not that much more so - most people will be satisfied with the Tamron lens TBH
@@christopherfrost thank you, have a great night!
Great video!
OMG Sensor dust 3:20
Hey great video, I just have a question. I have the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II USM (The one with nano USM motor) and I’ve used it for around 3 years. I’m quite happy with my lens, however its sharpness is just about average, and I tend to crop in a lot in my photos. I was wondering if getting this lens would actually yield me much sharper images. Some people even said that this 70-200 lens at 200mm cropped to 300mm equivalent, is actually sharper than 70-300mm at 300mm without any cropping, I’d like to hear your opinions about whether to keep my 70-300 or sell it and get a new 70-200 f4 IS II USM lens. Thanks in advance!
going from 24mp to 32mp, sensor becomes demanding and start giving shitty resolution for all lenses, while point of going from 24mp to 32mp was to give more resolution. Its a catch-22
good video, could you help me? Which do you think is the best option, this lens or the 70-300 f/4-5.6 L is usm? Thanks a lot. I have canon 90d.
They're both great. It depends on if you want the extra zoom range, or the slightly brighter maximum aperture
I have one because they are so compact, light and versatile. That and a 24-70mm 2.8L is all you need for travel. You need the 2.8 one of those because you'll use them indoors and at night a lot of the time. The 70-200 is an outdoor day time lens. Does everything from portraits to action. 4 is more than fast enough in daylight.
I have no idea why they released this lens for EF mount in 2020
Because I have a 6D and and it will soon be a good addition to the 16-35 and 50 mm lens..and many people still use dslr cameras..
@@thunder7382 that's great for you personally but this is R&D they could have put into RF lenses which are the future. There's already amazing EF lenses for everything, some of their best have been out for many years!
It just makes no sense to me why they did the work on this at this point in time
Did you know: there’s also a very nice FD version, the nFD 4.0/80-200mm L. It isn’t image stabilized because it is from 1985. But its image quality is stunning, too. It can be had for a fraction of the price of this lens in mint used condition.
He has an incredible video talking about the canon 80-200f/2.8 from back in the days. It’s worthy watch!
gabriel Ide Yes, this lens is the EF successor of the aforementioned 80-200mm as far as I know
Why would you review a Canon lens on a Sony body?
Please also review f2.8 mark II. thank for all your efforts.
You're like the Billy Mays of lenses.
Acording to wikipediaThis lens was realese in june 2018. just 3 monts before the f2.8 IS USM L iii was realese Christ.
How did that sensor get that dirty ? hahahha
I use my camera and change lenses all the time :-)
heyyyy my first l lens was a 70-200 f/4 am i a cooooool kiddddd
Tub selfy! And...sploosh~
Canon sensors seem to be inferior to Sony's.
Wow
oh your sensor is dirty :D
Or you buy for less money an used EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II lens with brighter aperture.
Mae BOI yn byw yn cymru
I have the LIII 2.8. Much better.