New 70-200's In the Hopper Nearing Announcement & Release

[shadowsports]

Still a rumor, but interesting nonetheless:

http://www.canonrumors.com/a-new-ef-70-200mm-is-coming-in-2018-cr3/

[shadowsports]

And they are finally here.  Shipping 8/30

New 70-200's

[TTMartin]

---

@shadowsports wrote:

And they are finally here.  Shipping 8/30

New 70-200's

---

Canon Youtube video with Rudy Winston

New EF 70-200mm Lenses Provide Improved Performance and Results

[shadowsports]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@shadowsports wrote:

And they are finally here.  Shipping 8/30

New 70-200's

---

Canon Youtube video with Rudy Winston

New EF 70-200mm Lenses Provide Improved Performance and Results

---

Rudy's videos are always good.  I watched Fro-Knows (Jared Polin) too.  Looks like the new coatings are the biggest differences and ring placement. I'm happy with my v2.  I'm sure they will do well.    

[TTMartin]

---

@shadowsports wrote:

I watched Fro-Knows (Jared Polin) too.

---

I've never been a fan on Nikon users trying to review Canon gear. His review of the EOS 6D was one of those that perpetuated the myth that its AF had inadequate tracking which was nonsense. The only thing that was inadequate was how he set-up the AF since he was unfamiliar with Canon products.

[ebiggs1]

My question;

Would you buy the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 Lens for $1200 or the real deal Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens for $1300 ?  A $100 bucks a one stop !  I would go Canon all day long.  How about you?

[shadowsports]

If I had to choose... Canon even if its more. 

Otherwise brand pref is:

1. Canon

2. Sigma

3. Tamron (Don't own any currently)

[ebiggs1]

"Otherwise brand pref is:

1. Canon

2. Sigma

3. Tamron (Don't own any currently)"

Sorta agree but to me it depends on which lens and not which brand.  In the 70-200mil arena the new Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens will own it, IMHO, of course.  The price it too close to consider off brand, again IMHO. And, as pointed out just one stop difference.  A no brainer!

However, between the Sigma and Tamron 70-200mil's the Tamron G2 is a far better lens.  And, in the 24-70mm, the Tamron is also the better lens.  I have them and I use them.

I don't have the G2, (probably won't buy it either) in the 150-600mm range but until that lens was released the Sigma was/is the best (IMHO).

[TTMartin]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

My question;

Would you buy the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 Lens for $1200 or the real deal Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens for $1300 ?  A $100 bucks a one stop !  I would go Canon all day long.  How about you?

---

The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM:

It will be sharp wide open. If you have to stop down the Tamron for full sharpness, the one f/stop advantage goes away.

Wide appertures for light capture are less important with the high ISO performance of modern cameras with post processing.

Plus the Canon has better coatings and is the whiter white. 😉

I think the real deal is going to be on the remaining EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II lenses.

However, I would NOT pick up a remaining EF 70-200 f/4L IS lens. Having been released 12 years ago, it was really starting to show its age.

[TTMartin]

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Refurbished $1,679.20

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Well, I'll believe it when I see it.  Brand-N did upgrade their 70-200mil recently but the first one was so bad it really need it.  The Canon doesn't need it!

---

The only thing I can think that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II might need upgrading is to work as well with Teleconverters as the EF 100-400mm L IS II does.

---

I guess I don't see how the situations are comparable. The 70-200 is a constant-aperture zoom lens (and therefore doesn't have a problem with teleconverters at the long end), while the 100-400 isn't (and therefore conceivably does). What am I missing?

---

There is almost no loss of image quality when using Version III Teleconverters with the EF 100-400 L IS II.