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

[lellyk]

Hi

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

[ebiggs1]

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?

[Waddizzle]

"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?

[ebiggs1]

"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.

[Waddizzle]

"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?

[ebiggs1]

Looks like you decided.

[Waddizzle]

---

@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.

[ebiggs1]

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

[Waddizzle]

---

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

Lesley

---

Don't forget about us.

---------------------------------------------------------

Ernie raises a good point about tolerances.  Everything that is manufactured has a range of tolerances from quantities of ingredients in food recipes to fittings on a space shuttle. I think the 2mm figure the guy on the phone cited is not a tolerance, however. It is more of a correction to insure cummulative tolerances do not add up to gear that cannot fit.

Think of it as how a "2x4" piece of wood doesn't actually measure 2 inches by 4 inches.  If the "2 inch" dimension were actually 1 7/8", then the tolerance might be +/- 1/16".  Actual product runs would yield beams that measured between 1 13/16 and 1 15/16 of and inch.  The goal would be to ensure that the dimension never quite meets or exceeds 2 inches.  The tolarance range represents the limit of the accuracy by which they could make cuts in the wood.

It is probably a good thing if Canon purposely introduces a small amount of "play" in the lens mount hardware.  Doing so would allow for the lenses to "tolerate" minor thermal expansion and contraction, IMHO. 

[lellyk]

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.

[Waddizzle]

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.