topic Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens in EF & RF Lenses

Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

lellyk — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:37:51 GMT

I am an amateur however it is a serious hobby and I have been asked to photograph some weddings and decided to invest in this lens.

The results I am getting are shockingly bad. I understand due to the size of the lens that I must use a reasonably quick shutter speed, however the photos are not sharp.

I have a 70-300 F4 lens which I have been using instead as the results are constantly clear and sharp using the same settings. The expensive 2.8L gets left at home. Does anyone know of issues with a particular batch of this lens? The first one I got fell off my 6D (at a wedding, right at the vows!) and luckily the vendor replaced it, so it makes me wonder what on earth is going on.

Can anyone help with this?

Thanks

Lesley

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

Waddizzle — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 20:10:43 GMT

Post samples of the good and the bad. Shots taken with one lens, then the same subject with the other lens.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ScottyP — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:51:20 GMT

Did the photos from the first one look good, or are the pictures from both bad? There is no way there would be two shockingly screwed-up 70-200's shipped in a row. If both worked badly for you it is not a problem with the lens.

What camera?

What shutter speed?

Problem exists only only at wide apertures (f/2.8 to f/4), or also when stopped down to f/5.6 or higher? The depth of field at wide apertures is very shallow, so most of the image won't be in focus; only the point the camera focuses on.

Are you shooting single point AF or leaving them all active for the camera to choose from? At f/2.8 you had better shoot with just the center AF point active, and then place that red point over the closest eyeball to you. That one eyeball may be the only thing in sharp focus.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 15:01:54 GMT

"Did the photos from the first one look good, or are the pictures from both bad? There is no way there would be two shockingly screwed-up 70-200's shipped in a row. If both worked badly for you it is not a problem with the lens."

I agree with this totally. Plus it it is nearly impossible to take "bad" pictures with this lens. It is not a difficult lens to master. Actually it is pretty forgiving. Not trying to dis you but trying to help find the problem.

A sample photo will go along way to explain the issue.

You are a lucky individual if the retailer took back a lens that you dropped. I have heard of folks that have had that happen to them although I can't for the life of me see how. It's not like I haven't had the opportunity as I have had cameras in my hands for 8 or 10 hours a day at times. Be it as it may, show us an example.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

lellyk — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 16:23:57 GMT

Thanks folks. I'll have a look at the weekend and try to post examples and check my settings.

Lesley

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

TCampbell — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:41:53 GMT

I'm sure several of us can post examples of the lens' performance. It's an outstanding lens. It's THE single best 70-200 in the entire industry.

I don't have the "II"... I have the original version -- which is also an amazingly good lens. The II is just a tiny bit better.

I can think of numerous reasons why a good lens would end up with missed focus. Certainly some example shots would be helpful.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

lellyk — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:03:00 GMT

I must be doing something wrong. Definitely using single, fixed focus and it could be as suggested that the DOF is so shallow the rest looks blurred but not 100% convinced. It's probably shutter speed but I'll look out examples at the weekend and post them. Thank you.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:19:05 GMT

Tim....?

"The II is just a tiny bit better."

Really, that's your thoughts?

You need to try or rent one. I bet you change your mind quickly. I sold my version 1 as there is no way I would use it after using the 2. I also sold the f4 model for the same reason.

Same story on the ef 24-70mm f2.8l version 2. The version 1 is not even in the same zip code as the 2.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

TCampbell — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:02:47 GMT

I can see the difference between the 24-70 I vs II... but not so much in the 70-200 I vs. II.

It occurs to me the IS picked up a performance improvement on the II (I think it's now rated to 4 stops and the old one is probably 3 stops). The-Digital-Picture website claims it also got an improvement in handling lens flare, but I've never had a lens flare issue with my lens. When I stare at the MTF comparisons, it really doesn't look like the optics got much of an improvement (although, again, The-Digital-Picture claims he sees a lot more of a difference then he expected to see.)

Here's a couple of samples (you can see these in more detail if you check the Flickr page where you can see it much larger size.)

This first image is actually quite a crop-in on the original shot. But if you scan around the metal bits, and wood bits, you'll see tons of detail even if you really crop in.

The Oiler by Tim Campbell, on Flickr

The above shot was, of course, using a higher aperture for mroe depth of field. So here's a sample using a lower focal ratio (in this case it's f/4):

Cotswold Garden by Tim Campbell, on Flickr

You can (hopefully) see why I feel like my 70-200 version I copy isn't really lacking in the ability to produce sharp images.

The 24-70 is a different story. I see the weaknesses in the original. It's too bad they changed the lens to a normal zoom and jumped to an 82mm filter thread. I really LIKED the reverse-zoom nature of the original because I had a much deeper lens hood which works a lot better on bright sunny days (and the original 24-70 had a problem with lens flare if the sunlight hit it -- and my copy suffers from this. I really have to be careful about the sun with this lens.)

(NOTE: Not sure what happened in this post, but suddenly the link in the Canon forum editor that would normally allow me to upload or embed an image wasn't working. I had to manually edit in some HTML to get these to work. Hopefully it worked.)

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:08:54 GMT

"You can (hopefully) see why I feel like my 70-200 version I copy isn't really lacking in the ability to produce sharp images."

Tim we both know I can't compare what I don't have. Which would be the same image done with the 2 on the same camera.

However, I was able to do that with my own copies of each. Yes, the 1 is a nice lens. No doubt. The 2 just is, and more, better. Not only in IQ but like you confess, its IS, too. Not to mention a quicker AF.

I am fortunate enough to have all the major offerings from the best makers in this class. The Canon 2 clearly wins, hands down.

I place the Tamron in second place. Since the Nikon has focal length problems I consider it a no-go, period. They gotta fix it.

From 70 to approx. 150mm it's pretty good.

I actually I do miss the old 24-70mm f2.8 (sold it) but the new one is so very much better. Way more than just a "tiny" bit better. Actually I thought my ef 28-70mm f2.8 was sharper than my 24-70mm f2.8 version 1.

Remember this is just my humble opinion form my own usage and experience. It and 5 dollars will buy you a Starbucks.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

Waddizzle — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:46:43 GMT

@Ernie

"I am fortunate enough to have all the major offerings from the best makers in this class. The Canon 2 clearly wins, hands down. I place the Tamron in second place. Since the Nikon has focal length problems I consider it a no-go, period. They gotta fix it. From 70 to approx. 150mm it's pretty good."

I have been pondering on which 70-200mm to choose. I have it down to one of three directions, in no particular order.

1. Canon 70-200mm f/4L USM / Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

2. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO OS HSM / Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Vi DC USD

3. Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Choice #1 is the budget choice, because I'm no pro. I like the f/4L IS because it is weather sealed, but is it worth nearly double the cost to me. I'm thinking no. Not really. If I go with the f/4, I might as well stick with the non-IS version. The non-IS f/2.8 is comparably priced as the f/4 IS, so I would go with that, instead. I don't see myself in harsh conditions because of my health.

Similarly, choice #2 is a budget version of #3. I'm leaning towards Tamron over the Sigma because of weather sealing. I assume that this is the Tamron that you're mentioning above, which is what piqued my interest.

Choice #3 is the lens I would really want to have, but I have to ask myself do I need it for IQ, or do I want for bling. I am perfectly happy with the IQ I get from the 24-105 f/4L, but I ask myself is that because I've never seen what a really good lens can actually do. Buying the Canon 70-200 f/4L IS USM is nearly 2/3 the cost, so I might as well take the plunge from the high board.

As of now, I'm leaning towards the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM because of the image quality I keep hearing about, and the images that I have seen. But, is it really that big of a jump in IQ over the Tamron?

I have the Sigma 150-500, but have noticed the OS seems to get into a tug-of-war at times with the AF? Do either of the Sigma or Tamron lenses exhibit this trait? The pair are actually sitting in third place on list of choices. I like the "big Siggy", but I do find myself using it most of the time with the OS turned off.

I want a best buy for IQ, not necessarily the state-of-the-art. But, I have reservations about the Tamron, though. What do you think is the best buy at 70-200mm?

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:08:17 GMT

The simple answer to your question, IMHO as always, is buy the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Zoom Lens for Canon. If you can't afford the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens that is. The Canon is enough better in all its specs over all the others to warrant it, to me. Is it to you? I can't answer that. If it were me and I had the coin, I would get the Canon. It has no peer. If you decide on the Tammy make absolutely sure you get the exact model I listed. There have been several versions and some are not, well, lets say worthy!

Do you have to have f2.8 ? No? Well the Canon f4 version with IS is a darn fine lens, too. If I didn't need or want f2.8, I would buy it as a second choice. After all f2.8 is just one stop faster than f4. Just one stop! If you can stick with Canon. You will be far better off in the long run. Stick with Canon!

Now the Sigma is a nice lens. It is almost the Tamron. I would have no problem using it. Matter of fact I do use one! I absolutely loved the 50-150mm version of it on a cropper. Sold it. Neither, or none of these, are weather sealed so forget that thought. I don't care what they claim or others say.

I have the Sigma 150-500mm. What can I say? It's OK but not a great lens. All of the above will show you better IQ. If I were you I would sell it and buy the 150-600mm version. I still have mine, actually the third one I bought. I keep it around when someone wants to barrow a tele I usually let them use it. BTW, the first two were pure junk.

So what is your decision?

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

Waddizzle — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:26:51 GMT

"The simple answer to your question, IMHO as always, is buy the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Zoom Lens for Canon. If you can't afford the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens that is. The Canon is enough better in all its specs over all the others to warrant it, to me. Is it to you? I can't answer that. If it were me and I had the coin, I would get the Canon. It has no peer. If you decide on the Tammy make absolutely sure you get the exact model I listed. There have been several versions and some are not, well, lets say worthy!"

I can afford any one of the lenses. Pride says get the Canon bling. My gut says to go with that Tamron you listed. If the weather sealing is actually capable of doing the job, I just may do that.

My big reservation with the Tamron has been with the weird OS issues that I have experienced with the Sigma 150-500. If the Tamron has that same or similar OS system, I'm staying away from it. Does it?

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:09:19 GMT

"My big reservation with the Tamron has been with the weird OS issues that I have experienced with the Sigma 150-500. If the Tamron has that same or similar OS system, I'm staying away from it. Does it?"

First off the Tamron is not a Sigma. They don't do IS the same way so no it doesn't. No other Siggy I have has acted like the 150-500mm does (did). And to be fair my current one (one out of three) does not have problems. It is a nice lens. It just isn't a great lens.

The Canon 70-200mm f2.8 is weather sealed. The others are not. Don't you believe them. They have efforts at it but that's all.

Question. If you can drop the dime on the Canon why are you even considering anything else? Just curious because the only reason to consider the others is, you can't afford the Canon.

Most of the 40+ lenses in the formerly stop-bath stained walls of my darkroom, sit there mostly untouched. Why, you say?

Because of the Canon pair, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II and the 70-200mm f2.8L IS II. I have little desire to use anything else. They are that much better. I don't know how much more I can say about them.

Now does that mean the others aren't good? No, just not for me. If you can, stick with Canon.

You have to consider that all the gear made today are pretty darn good. It is really in the degree of how good is good? That question is different for differetn folks. You have to answer that. Some will want a better build but are not so conerned with IQ.

Some only see IQ. Some want AF speed and accuracy. Some want resale value and so on and so on. If you want it all get the Canon.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

Waddizzle — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:34:33 GMT

"Question. If you can drop the dime on the Canon why are you even considering anything else? Just curious because the only reason to consider the others is, you can't afford the Canon."

If I am only driving my car between home, the grocery store, church, and the park, do I need to buy the luxury sedan when I all I really want is reliability, cargo space, and air-conditioning?

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:36:49 GMT

Looks like you decided.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

Waddizzle — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:45:58 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
Looks like you decided.

It'll be the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM. I think the speed will come in handy indoors.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:28:42 GMT

Wise man. Old Chinese proverb, "Buy the best and cry once."

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

Waddizzle — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:50:51 GMT

I picked up the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM last night, and have decided to take it back. I seem to have the same issue as the OP of this thread. The lens is a loose fit on the camera. I can see why his lens may have fallen off the camera.

The lens has the identical amount of play and slack on both my 6D and T5. It is so loose that it actually makes a rattling noise, which at first I thought was being caused by the battery grip on my 6D. I removed it, and it still rattled.. There must be about 1/16 to 1/8 of an inch worth of rotational slack in the mount.

Yes, there is a production issue with the lens.

Re: Issues with the EF2.8L 70-200mm USM II lens

ebiggs1 — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:05:13 GMT

Call Canon Suport first.

My lens fits perfectly on all six of the current bodies I am using.