@@josephjohnson1464 not true...if you have a mirrorless camera the sound goes out constantly when the IS on..in photo mode. I'm still Ok with it even if it kills battery.
Great comparison! I have version 1, and have loved its optic performance. However, I was one of the scores of victims of the manual focus "slipping" problem (Lots of examples online and TH-cam), which I believe was eventually remedied in production. However, most of us had to pay for the repair ($250+) ourselves since the lens was out of warranty. I'm a Canon fan, but the fact that canon left us on our own to take care of a manufacturing problem of a very fine lens left a very bad taste in my mouth.
Thanks for this video. This lens will be my first L series lens. I'll be using it on my 80d. I'll keep my 55-250 is stm for use on my 40d. By the way, your video with the noise testing really sold me on getting this lens.
Mode 3 is not for video, its for fast action and to have no stabilizer in the OVF which can be annoying and the stabilizer turns on when you press the shutter just before taking the picture.
I have version1. An excellent lens. I don't shoot video, care nothing about video, wish these cameras didn't have video. For me, the version 2 doesn't offer enough to make me upgrade. If my version 1 died, then I would go for ver. 2. I am sure it is a fine lens.
If you want the best one between these two lenses, Version 2 is better in most categories. If you want to save money and get almost the same quality, then get Version 1.
Just purchased a used 70-200 F4 IS, be interesting to see how it compares to my 55-250 stm. I still think the constant F4 will be beneficial. Good video 👍
I just ordered the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens after seeing many videos and your video was the one that made my decision to order it for my Canon 80D. Thank you for taking your time in making it. 🇺🇲🤙🏼
If budget is your main concern, then get the mark 1. I personally would only buy the Mark 2 at this point, but I'm not nearly concerned with budget as you might be. I just want the better lens. Therefore, get the lens you can afford and try to make the best out of it.
If I did not already own the Mark-i version, I would purchase the Mark-2. However, Canon has not put enough on the table with this new lens to make me want to switch. I don't shoot Canon's sucky video, instead I use my Sony A6500 when I want video, because I like the 4K capability. So any noise that the lens generates is of no importance to me! The Mark-i and I am sure the Mark-ii is a wonderful general purpose telephoto lens. I absolutely love my copy and have shot virtually all my Canon portraits using this lens and have caried it all over the world. I can carry this lens and an extra body at the weight of the f/2.8L IS version alone. AND... it works pretty well with my A-6500 and an MC-11 adapter.
I use a 80D and planning to get a L series lens. I am confused in between 24-105 IS II and 70-200 IS I. I also have a 10-18 stm. I do most travel and street photography. Could you share your real life experience. I can only go for either 24-105 or 70-200 IS i
No difference at all. I personally find the 18-135mm more useful, but if you primarily need telephoto shots, then the 55-250mm is decent outdoors, not so great in low light, though.
Video Gizmology Thanks! So I would be much better off going with the 70-200 since I’m looking for a better quality picture and don’t necessarily need 250mm
Thanks for the review, I also have the 80D and hoping to get the 5DMK4 in the future for video. Do you think the 70-200m F4 II is a better buy over the 70-200m F2.8 II (which cost $300-400 more than F4 II?
Yes. In my opinion, the f2.8 is only good for it's f/2.8 aperture, which could be a big deal if you need f/2.8. At f/4 on both lenses, I cannot tell the different in image quality. The 70-200m f/4 IS II is one of the most affordable high quality telephoto glass you can buy and I highly recommend for anyone who doesn't want to shell out the big bucks for the f/2.8
I agree with your points. As a videographer I might consider getting a 70-200m II f2.8 for that extra stop of light, but is it really worth the extra money? With the 70-200m F4 II I prob need to pump the ISO a bit more than having a 70-200m II f2.8, but do I really need want/need that bokeh? Lol :P
If you use a monopod or tripod, most definitely. The tripod collar is pricey (~$140) but gives better balance to the camera-lens combo. I have one and wouldn't be without it.
Has anyone experience if this lens works perfect with Canon 77D and with Fringer adaptor on Fujifilm XT cams? Some older Canon lenses don't work very well with our 77D, the aufocus is often much to slow. Besides, I tested a Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM with the Fringer adaptor on Fuji as we visited a photo swap meeting in March and the performance was very good in poor light conditions.
Maybe to you it's not, but for me it is. That's a difference of opinion and it's great to hear yours. I haven't tested the 2.8 IS II, so I wouldn't know. Also, one of the reasons why version I could be smoother than II is because it's older and with age, the rings loose their firmness.
The copy I had wasn't always sharp every time I manually zoomed, so I cannot verify if the lens is parfocal, but if you read Canon's spec sheet, they do not say the lens is parfocal. If this were in fact parfocal, Canon would make a big deal about it and put that on all their advertising. So the fact that Canon doesn't mention parfocal at all, probably means the lens is not parfocal.
I believe I also turned off the AF servo at one point. If not in the video, I did so in my other test of the 70-200mm f/4 IS and came to the conclusion that the IS still makes a lot of noise with the AF servo turned off. th-cam.com/video/o9eYywPq0FA/w-d-xo.htmlm55s
That stabilizer noise is completely irrelevant to a still photographer. Makes it an easy decision for me.
Definitely because if you are not shooting video that kind of noise won’t hurt a picture lol
@@josephjohnson1464 not true...if you have a mirrorless camera the sound goes out constantly when the IS on..in photo mode. I'm still Ok with it even if it kills battery.
Great comparison! I have version 1, and have loved its optic performance. However, I was one of the scores of victims of the manual focus "slipping" problem (Lots of examples online and TH-cam), which I believe was eventually remedied in production. However, most of us had to pay for the repair ($250+) ourselves since the lens was out of warranty. I'm a Canon fan, but the fact that canon left us on our own to take care of a manufacturing problem of a very fine lens left a very bad taste in my mouth.
Thanks! That's bad news about your lens. Canon should treat their customers better.
Thanks for this video. This lens will be my first L series lens. I'll be using it on my 80d. I'll keep my 55-250 is stm for use on my 40d. By the way, your video with the noise testing really sold me on getting this lens.
you're welcome! I hope you like the lens. I think it's great.
I'm looking in your chanel if did you make a review about the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM Lens?🤔
Mode 3 is not for video, its for fast action and to have no stabilizer in the OVF which can be annoying and the stabilizer turns on when you press the shutter just before taking the picture.
Thanks for the clarification!
I have version1. An excellent lens. I don't shoot video, care nothing about video, wish these cameras didn't have video.
For me, the version 2 doesn't offer enough to make me upgrade. If my version 1 died, then I would go for ver. 2. I am sure it is a fine lens.
Which of the two 70-200 lenses is better for bird and nature photography?
If you want the best one between these two lenses, Version 2 is better in most categories. If you want to save money and get almost the same quality, then get Version 1.
Just purchased a used 70-200 F4 IS, be interesting to see how it compares to my 55-250 stm. I still think the constant F4 will be beneficial. Good video 👍
DCT123 hi there, I have the 55-250 and I’m looking to upgrade. Can i ask how did you find the 70-200 F4 IS ?
I just ordered the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens after seeing many videos and your video was the one that made my decision to order it for my Canon 80D. Thank you for taking your time in making it. 🇺🇲🤙🏼
How's the lens sir? planning to buy one☺️
@@erikaptureddid you get one? how is it?
sooo motor sound ... seems like a minor update
Thanks for confirming the noise on the mark 1 I thought it was broken or something
Is it worth buying mark 1 now? I am on budget sooo I am looking for something cheaper but with quality...
If budget is your main concern, then get the mark 1. I personally would only buy the Mark 2 at this point, but I'm not nearly concerned with budget as you might be. I just want the better lens. Therefore, get the lens you can afford and try to make the best out of it.
Considering I don't shoot any video and am on a budget, you'd recommend the first gen right?
Yes or even the 55-250mm lens, if you really want to save money and half an APS-C sensor camera
If I did not already own the Mark-i version, I would purchase the Mark-2. However, Canon has not put enough on the table with this new lens to make me want to switch. I don't shoot Canon's sucky video, instead I use my Sony A6500 when I want video, because I like the 4K capability. So any noise that the lens generates is of no importance to me!
The Mark-i and I am sure the Mark-ii is a wonderful general purpose telephoto lens. I absolutely love my copy and have shot virtually all my Canon portraits using this lens and have caried it all over the world. I can carry this lens and an extra body at the weight of the f/2.8L IS version alone. AND... it works pretty well with my A-6500 and an MC-11 adapter.
Good info....good comparison of lenses. Thanks
I use a 80D and planning to get a L series lens. I am confused in between 24-105 IS II and 70-200 IS I. I also have a 10-18 stm. I do most travel and street photography. Could you share your real life experience. I can only go for either 24-105 or 70-200 IS i
if you shooting landscapes\etc you need 24-105, but for this u have 10-18 wide, so i preffer 70-200, but on 24-105 you can shoot people (40-70mm).
How big of a difference in image quality is there between the 18-135 kit lens and the 55-250?
No difference at all. I personally find the 18-135mm more useful, but if you primarily need telephoto shots, then the 55-250mm is decent outdoors, not so great in low light, though.
Video Gizmology Thanks! So I would be much better off going with the 70-200 since I’m looking for a better quality picture and don’t necessarily need 250mm
Thanks for the review, I also have the 80D and hoping to get the 5DMK4 in the future for video. Do you think the 70-200m F4 II is a better buy over the 70-200m F2.8 II (which cost $300-400 more than F4 II?
Yes. In my opinion, the f2.8 is only good for it's f/2.8 aperture, which could be a big deal if you need f/2.8. At f/4 on both lenses, I cannot tell the different in image quality. The 70-200m f/4 IS II is one of the most affordable high quality telephoto glass you can buy and I highly recommend for anyone who doesn't want to shell out the big bucks for the f/2.8
I agree with your points. As a videographer I might consider getting a 70-200m II f2.8 for that extra stop of light, but is it really worth the extra money? With the 70-200m F4 II I prob need to pump the ISO a bit more than having a 70-200m II f2.8, but do I really need want/need that bokeh? Lol :P
Would you need a tripod collar with this lens?
A tripod collar is not necessary for either version of this lens.
If you use a monopod or tripod, most definitely. The tripod collar is pricey (~$140) but gives better balance to the camera-lens combo. I have one and wouldn't be without it.
Has anyone experience if this lens works perfect with Canon 77D and with Fringer adaptor on Fujifilm XT cams? Some older Canon lenses don't work very well with our 77D, the aufocus is often much to slow. Besides, I tested a Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM with the Fringer adaptor on Fuji as we visited a photo swap meeting in March and the performance was very good in poor light conditions.
Did the adapter still give power to the lens? The aperture may not get power so it may have stayed at a high f-stop
great video ,thank you. very helpful
Is the zoom ring in the II as smooth as in the I version? :-D
Yes, I think it's smoother.
@@VideoGizmology No it's not, I've just received it and it's not as rough as the 2.8 IS II but a little bit more than the f4 IS.
Maybe to you it's not, but for me it is. That's a difference of opinion and it's great to hear yours. I haven't tested the 2.8 IS II, so I wouldn't know. Also, one of the reasons why version I could be smoother than II is because it's older and with age, the rings loose their firmness.
It's parfocal lens or not?
Officially it is not parfocal according to Canon.
@@VideoGizmology did you no try?
The copy I had wasn't always sharp every time I manually zoomed, so I cannot verify if the lens is parfocal, but if you read Canon's spec sheet, they do not say the lens is parfocal. If this were in fact parfocal, Canon would make a big deal about it and put that on all their advertising. So the fact that Canon doesn't mention parfocal at all, probably means the lens is not parfocal.
@@VideoGizmology thank you
Very nice 👍 and informative review. !
Will the 2nd version f4 work with my old cropped sensor 550D SLR? I'm gonna be doing a mix of photo and video work.
Yes.
Thanks for helpful review.
at the end you point to the version one and say version two. that confuses me a lot. or maybe i didnt understand it well
facepalm.. you testes IS sound with AF servo turned on.. which defeats the purpose!
I believe I also turned off the AF servo at one point. If not in the video, I did so in my other test of the 70-200mm f/4 IS and came to the conclusion that the IS still makes a lot of noise with the AF servo turned off. th-cam.com/video/o9eYywPq0FA/w-d-xo.htmlm55s
Stm is better in video
you must be deaf i heard it on every one
You must have super human hearing abilities. lol.