Canon 70-200 lens

[John Hegg]

At the risk of sounding dumb I have a question regarding the 70-200 2.8L non IS lens. Since I have never shot with anything but the 28-135 kit lens on my 40D. Is there anything I should know about or shoot differently with the 70-200? I will be shooting a local club Hi speed Autocross, only a couple of cars on the track at a time, and regular wheel to wheel racing at Autobahn CC track in Joliet, IL.
Thanks
John

[John Thawley]

Be prepared to weep over what you've been missing. Incredible lens. You'll practically here it bang, it focuses so fast.

JT

[Steve Stein]

I upgraded from the 70-200 f4 to the 70-200 2.8 non-is. The f4 version was incredibly sharp. The 2.8 is slightly less sharp at 2.8, but not enough to matter. It weighs a lot more than the f4 version, but it is worth it for the 2.8 aperture.

Focus is a bit faster than the f4 version. It tracks real nice with the 40D and 1D Mk III. It's DNO focus.

[Aaron Kupferman]

Yeah, after carrying it around all day you will definitely notice the weight. Like John said, it is a great lens - you won't want to give it back. I use mine with the 1.4x teleconverter as well which works nicely (100mm - 280mm).

Have fun shooting with it!

[John Hegg]

Be prepared to weep over what you've been missing. Incredible lens. You'll practically here it bang, it focuses so fast.

JT

John,
My 28-135 kinda "thunks" when it focuses. Is that the same as the 70-200? LOL
I realize that using this lens will probably be detrimental to my wallet!

I am about ready to get one, however I do have some issues with the way that Canon or whoever raised the prices just before announcing the Canon Rebates. So the price for the IS version, with the Rebate, is the about same as it was in about Nov/Dec/Jan without the Rebate. Bad timing on my part I suppose.

The debate is IS or Non-IS. I will be using it for non motorsport shooting , such as static car shoots etc., so I could see where it would come in play. The extra $400 + is a killer though.

Thanks for the input gentlemen
John

[Bill Jurasz]

The image stabilizer on the 70-200 in the "mode 2" setting can come in handy when doing slow shutter pans. It will basically stabilize only in the vertical direction while allowing the camera to travel horizontally. Quite nice.

[Aaron Kupferman]

I'd say get the IS. Better to have it when you need it than kick yourself for not getting it. Also, the IS will help the lens keep its value better for resale if that ever happens. I'm keeping mine for life though, so the IS had to happen.

[Steve Stein]

I got my non-IS from a friend who just had to have the IS for wedding work. He gave me a great deal. Of course, I had to buy him several adult beverages to get that price. It might have been cheaper buying a new IS version after the bar tab arrived.

[John Thawley]

The only advantage of IS is the increased number of blades in the shutter will generate slightly nicer bokeh.

The panning mode is a farce. ALL IS can control is tremble. PERIOD.. end of story. It will slow down the autofocus and but an increased burden on batteries.

Save your $500. I've sold and replaced by 70-200 non-IS lenses a couple of times. Typically have cost me about $150 for two-three years ownership.

[Aaron Kupferman]

Yeah, for motorsports and other action stuff the IS is pretty much useless, but for general use it is great having that extra two stops or so of handholdability. I assume you won't ONLY be using it for motorsports and action stuff, right?

[Dave Verna]

Nikon's 70-200 VR will detect panning and stop the side to side vibration reduction while still maintaining up and down... I thought Canon had that ability?