I know this is an older video, but I just came across it. I had the 2.8 version, but I never took it with me while traveling. I was big and heavy, so it stayed at home. I now have the f4 version, and it is very light weight, and I take it with me more than the 2.8.
I’m currently looking at both of these lens. Mainly to shoot motorsport, panning and family portraits whilst out and about. I’d like to get away with the f4 to save around £700!
I've owned both and used them with my EOS R, long story short if you are going after image quality and sharpness then go with the 2.8 version if you don't mind the weight.
I've owned both of these lenses for a while, and although the f4 IS II is lighter, the look just isn't the same, its taken me 2 years of missing the 2.8, there's just something "romantic" about the look, the F4 just doesn't have it. The f4 is a great lens and is super light and fun to use, but the 2.8 is such a great well rounded lens. Either one will be sufficient for almost any photo.
@@trevorsowers2202 yes! I use the 2.8 when I know I need it, but refuse to carry it anymore with a kit of Zeiss primes. Had an f4 before and loved it until f2.8 love got me. I need to compare the f4 +135 f2 Zeiss weight vs a the 2.8. So far my conclusion is the 135 plus an rf100-400.
Thank you. Judging by portrait photos on Flickr, I'll opt for the 2.8, as it has much better microcontrast as revealed in the texture on faces - where the f/4 looks flatter and duller. I've seen comments by other pros who've made the same observation. Thankfully, the used prices of the 2.8s are inviting now.
@@alexandrelongaray3987 confesso que não vejo mta diferença e nem necessidade urgente para o meu uso em fazer o update. Talvez eu opte por outra tele. Abraço
I came here to see the zoom capabilities of this lens and I find that it shows up as a fixed lens. It would have been important if at least one shot could be seen zooming in since I read in a review that it is a lens that behaves in a parafocal way. Thanks for the effort to make this video anyway.
Guardian Observer I seriously am. Iv even pixel peeped on my stills and really haven’t noticed any loss in the quality of its reproduction even at a micro contrast level and sharp bright light. As long as the images are optimally exposed. I own a 70-200 IS f2.8 version 1. It’s a tank. Now I really have no need for it.
Guardian Observer It’s permanently on my m50. 70-200 works amazing but you got to look at the EF135 f2. Jesus that lens in incredible especially when I can get it down to f1.4 I’m seriously low light conditions rather then f2.8.
Nice composition video. Just got a 70-200mm f2.8L (s3), magical lens. The f4 version wasn't in store so decided to spoil myself and spurge a bit. The new Sigma version was also tempting but the tripod ring on the Sigma is a bit annoying.
If I were to buy one of these, now, they would be used on my 80d. But 80d has a significant limitation--Diffraction limiting aperture is 5.9. I have not beern able to find a graph showing image quality drop off beyond f/5.9. Now the mark 3 of the f/2.8 L is available, but I don't see a reason to spend more money for it. The f/4 version has 5 stops of image stabilization..I think the f/2.8 is only 3.5.
if you upgrade the camera to a full frame, you'd see definite improvement in image quality. i have a relatively cheap 6D Mark 2 and I'm quite happy with it - using it for video and photography. My walk-around lens is a Canon 35 mm f/2 IS USM, and I just ordered a 70-200 f/4 IS Version 2.
I don't think DFA is something we should really care about. The difference is extremely slim and most 70-200 lenses shines at f5.6 anyway. Post processing would take care of the rest. I don't think you would need more than 4 stops of IS while that 1 extra stop can be crucial to capture movement- you get 1/200s instead of 1/100s. The only issues is the weight- a f2.8 lens weight twice as much as its f4 cousin and boy- holding a camera with a 1,6kg 70-200 f2.8 lens for 3 hours can be really tiring.
I was so proud of my precious 2.8 and then realized it was too heavy to carry around on casual trips. I thought I totally wasted my money until I got to use it for graduation pictures for my friends and recently, to take wedding pictures of me and my wife. Now it is gathering dust again... Nonetheless, I have no regrets.
if u put an extension tube on the F4 wil the autofocus keep working? with the F2.8 you get a 280mm F4 or a 400mm F5.6 with autofocus. how is that with the F4 version? or this works or not makes a big difference for me, since i even like to put on the 1.4 extender on my 300mm prime with some animals in the zoo. looking forward to your answer.
I ammplanning a photography holiday to Frankfurt soon. Ill be sure to check out the bar....maybe buy you a drink for this very great video if i find you there...😜😜. Excellent video sir.
Something to bare in mind, the 70-200 2.8 ii is older, meaning there's plenty of refurbished and used ones on offer. The F4 ii hasn't had time to get old yet, I can't even find any refurbished or used ones. A used 2.8 costs the same and is a stop faster.
@@Spazza42 yep, wright, but usually who sell such a lens is heavely used , and sometimes with focus problems. From my side rather new , even expresiver
Hallo, mich interessiert unterscheid zwischen Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II USM. Und Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. Würden sie mir erklären? Gruß, Goran
huhu, kann ich dir nicht genau beantworten, weil ich die Mark III Version nicht habe und auch nie hatte. Ich nehme mal an, dass die MKIII Version deutlich schärfer ist und vielleicht etwas leichter geworden ist. Ich hatte Jahre lang die f/2.8 MK II Version und war super happy.
![INEXPENSIVE lens! Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L [Eng Sub]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eGmOhz0LOYk/mqdefault.jpg)
![INEXPENSIVE lens! Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L [Eng Sub]](/img/tr.png)
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I know this is an older video, but I just came across it.
I had the 2.8 version, but I never took it with me while traveling. I was big and heavy, so it stayed at home. I now have the f4 version, and it is very light weight, and I take it with me more than the 2.8.
Hey there, it's still a super nice lens. Have a look at my updated video, Daniel --> th-cam.com/video/AmNQF6WGEJk/w-d-xo.html
I’m currently looking at both of these lens. Mainly to shoot motorsport, panning and family portraits whilst out and about. I’d like to get away with the f4 to save around £700!
I've owned both and used them with my EOS R, long story short if you are going after image quality and sharpness then go with the 2.8 version if you don't mind the weight.
hey there, thanks for sharing your feedback. Daniel
I've owned both of these lenses for a while, and although the f4 IS II is lighter, the look just isn't the same, its taken me 2 years of missing the 2.8, there's just something "romantic" about the look, the F4 just doesn't have it. The f4 is a great lens and is super light and fun to use, but the 2.8 is such a great well rounded lens. Either one will be sufficient for almost any photo.
Thanks a lot for your feedback. To be honest, I feel the same. Regards from Frankfurt, Daniel
I prefer the primes for the unique look and the f/4 zoom for stopped down shooting
@@trevorsowers2202 yes! I use the 2.8 when I know I need it, but refuse to carry it anymore with a kit of Zeiss primes. Had an f4 before and loved it until f2.8 love got me. I need to compare the f4 +135 f2 Zeiss weight vs a the 2.8.
So far my conclusion is the 135 plus an rf100-400.
Thank you. Judging by portrait photos on Flickr, I'll opt for the 2.8, as it has much better microcontrast as revealed in the texture on faces - where the f/4 looks flatter and duller. I've seen comments by other pros who've made the same observation. Thankfully, the used prices of the 2.8s are inviting now.
Good job F4 is great for video work. 2.8 for low light.
Thank you for this information it was very helpful. I bought the F4 recently. I can't wait to try it out.
Great review! Took many months until I picked the F/4, no regrets so far! Keep the good work, cheers from Brazil!
Hello,
thanks a lot.
Happy to hear from South America.
Regards,
Daniel
Olá Fernando. Eu tenho a f/4L IS Mark 1. Você comprou a Mark 2?
@@alexandrelongaray3987 olá, eu tenho a MK1, a relação custo/benefício me pareceu mais interessante
@@rickmaveCRF Sim. Eu uso a um ano e meio. Agora estou de olho num upgrade pra um destes dois lançamentos. Abraço
@@alexandrelongaray3987 confesso que não vejo mta diferença e nem necessidade urgente para o meu uso em fazer o update. Talvez eu opte por outra tele. Abraço
Thank you for a great explanation of the two lenses.
Have the EF2.8II. Had an EF f4 and loved it. But the 2.8 for roaming around is too big, too heavy. I’m about to get the EF 4 VII for streeting.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Daniel
good video, could you advise 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 came here to see the zoom capabilities of this lens and I find that it shows up as a fixed lens. It would have been important if at least one shot could be seen zooming in since I read in a review that it is a lens that behaves in a parafocal way. Thanks for the effort to make this video anyway.
Good review with solid comparisons - I use the F4 with my Canon 6D MKII - pleased with results
Hello from Frankfurt, you are welcome. To do you live? Daniel
@@the_daniel_life Gutten tag!! I live in Los Angeles also in '77/78 I lived in Germany for about a year. My apartment was 45 km outside of Frankfurt
Great review mate... I wasn't sure which one buy but considering I'm landscapes photographer ,value and weight certainly I will buy f4 is ii...✌😁
Thanks for your opinion.
You are welcome.
Many greetings from Germany,
Daniel
Super helpful, especially the link to the photos for comparison. Thank you!!!
Great to hear that.
Thank you so much for watching.
Daniel
An excellent review, thanks a lot! )) And I hope it works well with a *2 canon extender
Thank you so much for this, you just convinced me I don't actually need the 2.8!
Great. Hope you will like it. Daniel
Iv got the 70-200 IS f4...I used the Viltrox speedbooster and now it’s a f2.8 on my canon m50. Happy days
Are you happy with the results?
I have a m3.
Guardian Observer I seriously am. Iv even pixel peeped on my stills and really haven’t noticed any loss in the quality of its reproduction even at a micro contrast level and sharp bright light. As long as the images are optimally exposed. I own a 70-200 IS f2.8 version 1. It’s a tank. Now I really have no need for it.
@@DiamondboyUkfitness Does this lens cooperate good with your camera? Is it good at the afternoon or evening with low light level?
Guardian Observer It’s permanently on my m50. 70-200 works amazing but you got to look at the EF135 f2. Jesus that lens in incredible especially when I can get it down to f1.4 I’m seriously low light conditions rather then f2.8.
Guardian Observer I use the m50 on the Viltrox speedbooster effectively giving me a focal length reducer to 0.7 and a full stop of light
Which is best for astrophotography?
Neither of them. Have a look at this lens here: th-cam.com/video/70JZRH0IbBk/w-d-xo.html
@@the_daniel_life Thanks Daniel
Nice composition video. Just got a 70-200mm f2.8L (s3), magical lens. The f4 version wasn't in store so decided to spoil myself and spurge a bit. The new Sigma version was also tempting but the tripod ring on the Sigma is a bit annoying.
If I were to buy one of these, now, they would be used on my 80d. But 80d has a significant limitation--Diffraction limiting aperture is 5.9. I have not beern able to find a graph showing image quality drop off beyond f/5.9. Now the mark 3 of the f/2.8 L is available, but I don't see a reason to spend more money for it. The f/4 version has 5 stops of image stabilization..I think the f/2.8 is only 3.5.
if you upgrade the camera to a full frame, you'd see definite improvement in image quality. i have a relatively cheap 6D Mark 2 and I'm quite happy with it - using it for video and photography. My walk-around lens is a Canon 35 mm f/2 IS USM, and I just ordered a 70-200 f/4 IS Version 2.
I don't think DFA is something we should really care about. The difference is extremely slim and most 70-200 lenses shines at f5.6 anyway. Post processing would take care of the rest. I don't think you would need more than 4 stops of IS while that 1 extra stop can be crucial to capture movement- you get 1/200s instead of 1/100s. The only issues is the weight- a f2.8 lens weight twice as much as its f4 cousin and boy- holding a camera with a 1,6kg 70-200 f2.8 lens for 3 hours can be really tiring.
I think you have just saved me a shed load of money !
Ohh sweet. Thank you for the support. Daniel
which option is better for portraits and landscapes? I have 6d mkII camera...
The f/2.8 version. Daniel
@@the_daniel_life thank you
Thanks for the great review! Alot of insights!
Thank you very much. Here is my new video about the 70-200‘s -> th-cam.com/video/AmNQF6WGEJk/w-d-xo.html
@@the_daniel_life just watched your video sir! Thanks! Now I am really having a hard time choosing :) both budget, quality, weight and future proof :)
thank you. exactly the comparison I was looking for. great video.
That’s great to hear.all the best from Greece, Daniel
Can both these lenses be used on Canon 90d ?
which one was best for street photography?
Both are great. Regarding weight I would go for the f4-Version, daniel
Day or night photography? Do you take photos at standing still subjects or to moving people?
@@albertcabrejo night and moving a lot
@@mammasgullunge
Are you referring to the ef 70-200mm f/4L is ii usm when you say night and moving?
Isn't the aperture small?
I was so proud of my precious 2.8 and then realized it was too heavy to carry around on casual trips. I thought I totally wasted my money until I got to use it for graduation pictures for my friends and recently, to take wedding pictures of me and my wife. Now it is gathering dust again... Nonetheless, I have no regrets.
Thank, I preferred 2.8 now since your review
Hello,
thanks for that.
Happy to hear that you made your decision based on this review.
Daniel
Hi, can I use these lens with canon 800D?
Yes. All EF lenses
Which one is better for night photography?
The f/2.8 version
Dear Daniel, actually even the f/2,8 was re-released. How do you see now the differences or the similarities? Thank you - Zolee.
I know that the centre has been re-released but I did not have a chance to test it out yet.stay tuned for another review.all the best from Frankfurt
Plz share the link for the monopod used in this video...
Hello, thanks. Now in the video description below. Daniel
Very good explanation. Thank you very much.
You are welcome. Thanks a lot.
Daniel
if u put an extension tube on the F4 wil the autofocus keep working?
with the F2.8 you get a 280mm F4 or a 400mm F5.6 with autofocus.
how is that with the F4 version?
or this works or not makes a big difference for me, since i even like to put on the 1.4 extender on my 300mm prime with some animals in the zoo.
looking forward to your answer.
Great review!!! Thank you! Cheers from Norway
I ammplanning a photography holiday to Frankfurt soon. Ill be sure to check out the bar....maybe buy you a drink for this very great video if i find you there...😜😜. Excellent video sir.
Thank you mate. Where are you coming from? ✌🏼
@@the_daniel_life Abuja...Nigeria
Thanks for the super helpfull comparison!
Thank you very much. Upcoming RF 70-200 vs EF 70-200mm f2.8 MK III. Stay tuned. Daniel
For portrait....how is f/4?
Also nice during daylight
@@the_daniel_life what about during sunset?
Thank you. PS - Who makes that little tripod in the video?
hey there, the little tripod is in the video description below. Daniel
Thnx mate for the info im a beginner in photography and i was confused what to buy ..but now i made my decision ... viele Grüße aus Aschaffenburg
Ach cool. Danke, freut mich. Eine deutsche Version gibt es auch. Daniel
th-cam.com/video/0DbRyeLn15A/w-d-xo.html
can i use these lens for canon rebel t6i....???????
Yes, you can use both of them. Daniel
I wonder the tripod/monopod you have. Can you send a link please... thanks for great video 👏👏👏 from Turkey...
Cheers from Frankfurt, check out this video --> th-cam.com/video/wOPX06dRSRs/w-d-xo.html
Great review mate thanks
you are welcome. Thanks for watching. daniel
Can this lens using with canon 1300D?
i little bit worried after i bought it then can't fit on it.
Yes. You can use all EF and EF-S lenses
Im super confused pictures look great but when you show video it look like its 720p?
When they were shot using a Canon camera they are at 720p.
Regards,
Daniel
Very good review Daniel.
Can I use 1300D ?
yes
Something to bare in mind, the 70-200 2.8 ii is older, meaning there's plenty of refurbished and used ones on offer. The F4 ii hasn't had time to get old yet, I can't even find any refurbished or used ones. A used 2.8 costs the same and is a stop faster.
True. Thanks for the info.
Daniel
There is mk iii for 2.8 and similar price with mkii
G T Not if you compare New and Used. A pristine used f2.8 IS II can be gotten for less than £1k. The IS III is £1699. Nowhere near the same price
@@Spazza42 yep, wright, but usually who sell such a lens is heavely used , and sometimes with focus problems. From my side rather new , even expresiver
G T That’s my point though, they’re not heavily used, they’re lightly used and are usually backed with a warranty.
Debating this purchase now. Thanks so much for the video.
Nice. Thank you very much. All the best from Frankfurt, Daniel
What have you decided?
Great review! thank you :)
Thank you very much.many greetings from Frankfurt, Daniel
Hallo, mich interessiert unterscheid zwischen Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II USM. Und Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. Würden sie mir erklären? Gruß, Goran
huhu, kann ich dir nicht genau beantworten, weil ich die Mark III Version nicht habe und auch nie hatte. Ich nehme mal an, dass die MKIII Version deutlich schärfer ist und vielleicht etwas leichter geworden ist. Ich hatte Jahre lang die f/2.8 MK II Version und war super happy.
Ahh schau mal hier. Ist zwar kein Vergleich zwischen EF und EF, aber die MK III Version kannst du hier sehen: th-cam.com/video/Q5UsmfarevQ/w-d-xo.html
Have watched 3 mins, then realized that I have not money for those >.
Ivan Odintsov on eBay the f4 sells for less that £400.
Superb video. I got the answer.... Thank you so much
thank you
You are welcome. Regard,
Daniel
great review,, nice explanation
Thank you very much for the support, Daniel
Fantastice review .thanks
Very good review 👍
thank you very much. Daniel
This was very informative, but I still don’t know which one to get. 😂
Decisions….
Which camera are you using? Did you watch this review? th-cam.com/video/AmNQF6WGEJk/w-d-xo.html
I want to hear him say “suffering succotash”😹
Get the 2.8
I have now this one ➡️ th-cam.com/video/UlCmjcPAtTs/w-d-xo.html
So Nice ❤️
Very good review.
Hello, what does USM mean?
Ultra Sonic Motor
@@the_daniel_life and basicaly that is for autofocus or?
hmmm his beard was impressive but very lacking in tattoos.. and i didn't see any bicycles on the wall or filament light bulbs so loses hipster cred
Hmmm. Next time.
Daniel
Shalawati sek wkwk
F4 looks under exposed,,, f2.8 is better
yes, I own this one here: th-cam.com/video/UlCmjcPAtTs/w-d-xo.html
Deine Muttersprache ist Deutsch oder? 😅
Ja und deshalb kannst du dieses Video hier auf deutsch sehen 📺 th-cam.com/video/0DbRyeLn15A/w-d-xo.html
free the giraffes
Thank you
You are welcome. Daniel