Zoom Lens - Canon 6d

[1taplay]

Hello all,

I own canon 6d with the 24-105 F4L and as of now, use the camera when i go on family trips. I am looking to get a zoom lens with best overall value, i.e. best image quality vs cost. With that said here are a few zoom lenses that im evaluating:

1. canon 70-200 F4L IS
2. canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II
3. canon 70-300 F4-5.6L IS

I have researched the 70-200's independently and know that the F2.8L II is the latest and greatest lens but as far as the image quality, the F4 and the F2.8 are identical. Additionally, the F4 is about 1/2 the cost and weight of the F2.8 so out of the two 70-200 choices, im finding it difficult to forsee the beneift of getting the F2.8 especially since i like to take pictures with everything in focus (aperture of 11). Is there something for the F2.8 II that im overlooking?

Apart from this, i would like to ask for people's thoughts about these lenses, espcially folks who have used the lens on a full frame body, preferably the canon 6d.

Thanks

[ScottyP]

The f/4 lens is said to be very sharp and is lighter and cheaper.

I would say everyone should own at least 1 lens that is f/2.8 or faster. If not a 2.8 zoom then at least a fast (approx) prime. Needed for low light situations and for the occasion when you do want shallow DOF to isolate the subject and get the bokeh going. If got another f/4 zoom I would also pick up a faster lens but then you have to get 2 lenses.

[ScottyP]

Also I do own a 6d and the 70-200 f/2.8 II IS is my favorite lens. I shoot it a lot and there are many times I find I need f/2.8 because of less than great light, and I hate shooting at high ISO if I can avoid it. Sometimes even f/2.8 is not enough like at the indoor water park, etc.

[RobertTheFat]

Either version of the 70-200 is going to be an unwieldy lens, which you'll use outdoors only if you really need it. There are certainly better walking-around lenses available. For indoor event photography or photojournalism, where you may not be able to use a tripod effectively, the f/2.8 really shines, while the f/4 may be a little slow. Bottom line: if you can afford the f/2.8, there will likely be times when you're very glad you have it.

Full disclosure: I've never used the f/4, but I have (and love) the f/2.8 IS II. However, it belongs to my employer, not to me. One of the reasons I don't retire is that I'd have to give it back.

[ebiggs1]

IMHO, the only lens you listed, if you can afford the price, is the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II.  Whomever told you the f4 version is the sharper is not your friend and doesn't know of what they speak.

On my 1Ds Mk III the f2.8 puts 18 precieved MP on the sensor while the f4 version only puts 15.  That is a big deal if you are into and wanting the sharpest.  Plus you get f2.8 over f4 but you must remember that is only one stop.  It is generally not a deal breaker.

Remember a lens is a sum of its parts.  Not a single spec.  The f2.8 version is generally better all across the spectrum, too.

The Tamrom 70-200mm f2.8 A009 is also sharper than the Canon f4 lens.  But again a lens is more than a single spec.  So you must weigh the entire package.

Certainly you jest comparring or considering the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM against the 70-200mm?  It is not in the same game!

[TTMartin]

I'm going to go against the grain here and suggest the 70-200 f/4L IS. 

In the film days and even the early days of digital you were ISO limited so the fastest possible lens was important.

With the great high ISO performance of the 6D getting an f/2.8 lens is much less important than it was in the past. 

Your main lens is f/4 so you already know if you feel limited by that maximum aperture.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

I'm going to go against the grain here and suggest the 70-200 f/4L IS. 

In the film days and even the early days of digital you were ISO limited so the fastest possible lens was important.

With the great high ISO performance of the 6D getting an f/2.8 lens is much less important than it was in the past. 

Your main lens is f/4 so you already know if you feel limited by that maximum aperture.

---

Interesting. That's the first I've heard of "the great high ISO performance of the 6D". (Are you sure you're not thinking of the 5D Mark III? It does have great high-ISO performance.) Perhaps you can provide some hard information to support that claim?

If I were the OP, and could afford it, I'd still take Ernie Biggs's advice and buy the f/2.8 IS II.

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@TTMartin wrote:

I'm going to go against the grain here and suggest the 70-200 f/4L IS. 

In the film days and even the early days of digital you were ISO limited so the fastest possible lens was important.

With the great high ISO performance of the 6D getting an f/2.8 lens is much less important than it was in the past. 

Your main lens is f/4 so you already know if you feel limited by that maximum aperture.

---

Interesting. That's the first I've heard of "the great high ISO performance of the 6D". (Are you sure you're not thinking of the 5D Mark III? It does have great high-ISO performance.) Perhaps you can provide some hard information to support that claim?

If I were the OP, and could afford it, I'd still take Ernie Biggs's advice and buy the f/2.8 IS II.

---

The 6D has a newer and better sensor than the one in the 5D Mk III. It equals or exceeds the high ISO performance of the 5D Mk III and has far less banding when pushed. It's pretty amazing you hadn't heard that, it is pretty much common knowledge on the gear oriented sites. Let me Google that for you!

[f64]

The 6D does, in fact have one additional stop beyond the 5D3, but the 5D3 has a one stop faster shutter.  I own and use both bodies and find the image quality of the 5D3 superior if for no reason other than the significantly better AF.  The 6D is better in low light and it is smaller and lighter on long trips.

Getting back to the question here, the OP's selection seems to fall in two categories. From my own experience I put the 70-200 f4 and the 70-300 in one category and the f2.8 in another. I've not used the f4 but I do use the other two. To answer the original question - get what you're comfortable with. Since the 6D has the additional ISO reach the f4 might be the logical choice. Just remember that IQ will suffer at those high levels. I always try and keep the ISO to its lowest level to capture the highest quality level image. If speed shots or sports are in your future with your family then the f2.8 will help significantly. A one stop faster lens will half your ISO setting - that's what we pay for.

[1taplay]

Thanks everyone for the comments, i have a few follow ups on some of the feedback, please consider all of my follow up comments as a way of thinking/brainstorming out loud...

---

@ScottyP wrote:
The f/4 lens is said to be very sharp and is lighter and cheaper.

I would say everyone should own at least 1 lens that is f/2.8 or faster. If not a 2.8 zoom then at least a fast (approx) prime. Needed for low light situations and for the occasion when you do want shallow DOF to isolate the subject and get the bokeh going. If got another f/4 zoom I would also pick up a faster lens but then you have to get 2 lenses.

---

---

@ScottyP wrote:
Also I do own a 6d and the 70-200 f/2.8 II IS is my favorite lens. I shoot it a lot and there are many times I find I need f/2.8 because of less than great light, and I hate shooting at high ISO if I can avoid it. Sometimes even f/2.8 is not enough like at the indoor water park, etc.

---

Yeah, so basically along with a zoom lens evaluation, im also researching the 50mm vs 85mm for my canon 6d. As for the low light, since i like to keep the background in focus, i dont see me dropping the aperture to 2.8, unless there is a way to drop the aperture to 2.8 and still get a background in focus?

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

IMHO, the only lens you listed, if you can afford the price, is the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II.  Whomever told you the f4 version is the sharper is not your friend and doesn't know of what they speak.

On my 1Ds Mk III the f2.8 puts 18 precieved MP on the sensor while the f4 version only puts 15.  That is a big deal if you are into and wanting the sharpest.  Plus you get f2.8 over f4 but you must remember that is only one stop.  It is generally not a deal breaker.

Remember a lens is a sum of its parts.  Not a single spec.  The f2.8 version is generally better all across the spectrum, too.

The Tamrom 70-200mm f2.8 A009 is also sharper than the Canon f4 lens.  But again a lens is more than a single spec.  So you must weigh the entire package.

Certainly you jest comparring or considering the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM against the 70-200mm?  It is not in the same game!

---

I dont think i mentioned that the F4 was sharper, based on my research, reading up on reviews and what not, most of the feedback on IQ was that the F2.8 and F4 had the same image quality. I dont know what u mean by "the f2.8 puts 18 precieved MP on the sensor while the f4 version only puts 15", i havent seen this being mentioned on any of the comparision reviews i have looked up so far.

---

@TTMartin wrote:

I'm going to go against the grain here and suggest the 70-200 f/4L IS. 

In the film days and even the early days of digital you were ISO limited so the fastest possible lens was important.

With the great high ISO performance of the 6D getting an f/2.8 lens is much less important than it was in the past. 

Your main lens is f/4 so you already know if you feel limited by that maximum aperture.

---

Yeah, so this was my exact dilemma, the F2.8 to F4 is only 1 stop, and the 6d does seem to have good high ISO performance, as for my current 24-105 F4, i am quite amazed by the picture quality that i get, yes the lens struggles when im indoors or in low light condition, but that could be because of my aperture being set at 11 to keep everything in focus, and im not sure how the F2.8 will help in this same exact case, i assume that F2.8 at aperture 11 will struggle the same way the F4 does at aperture 11?

---

@f64 wrote:

The 6D does, in fact have one additional stop beyond the 5D3, but the 5D3 has a one stop faster shutter.  I own and use both bodies and find the image quality of the 5D3 superior if for no reason other than the significantly better AF.  The 6D is better in low light and it is smaller and lighter on long trips.

Getting back to the question here, the OP's selection seems to fall in two categories. From my own experience I put the 70-200 f4 and the 70-300 in one category and the f2.8 in another. I've not used the f4 but I do use the other two. To answer the original question - get what you're comfortable with. Since the 6D has the additional ISO reach the f4 might be the logical choice. Just remember that IQ will suffer at those high levels. I always try and keep the ISO to its lowest level to capture the highest quality level image. If speed shots or sports are in your future with your family then the f2.8 will help significantly. A one stop faster lens will half your ISO setting - that's what we pay for.

i also try to do the same thing you do with ISO, i try to keep it as low as i possibly can to avoid that grain, regardless of how good the 6d is at high iso. Like i have mentioned in my follow up comments to others, the lens that i current have starts to show weakness at night but it could be because i keep my aperture at F11 to keep everything in focus, and with my beginner to intermediate photography skills, i am unaware of how to keep the background and foreground sharp without increasing my aperture so i assume that any lens at F11 at night would struggle?