Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM vs EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM: what’s the difference?
Asked 4/18/2012
4 views
2 answers
0
I’m comparing two Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L lenses and noticed a big price gap between the older EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM. What do “IS” and “II” mean here, and why is the newer lens so much more expensive? Is the IS II worth saving up for, or is the older non-IS version still a reasonable choice?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
4
Adding to to the answer above it has to be mentioned that a zoom lens benefits significantly from the Image stabilizer. I own the IS lens and can tell you that the effect is very strong, specially if you use a 1.4 or higher extension on the lens.
The price difference is given by the fact that the non-IS lens you listed here is much older (its the first, not the II model) AND lacks the image stabilizer. You should read reviews of all 4 lenses (IS vs. non-IS, I vs II) To see how big the quality difference is and if it matters to you. If you look for example at the lens flare comparison, the older lenses perform MUCH worse than the new ones, similar for contrast.
In general, I can only recommend to never save on a lens, specially the L lenses since they last for a very long time and are more important than having a good camera in my opinion. You will change bodies over the years more often than throwing out a lens and getting the successor model.
Originally by user9441. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user9441
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
They differ in two main ways:
- IS = Image Stabilization, which helps reduce blur from camera shake at slower shutter speeds. It helps with handholding, but not with subject movement.
- II = second-generation version of the stabilized lens.
The older 70-200mm f/2.8L USM is a much older design and has no stabilization. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM adds IS and is also a newer optical design, with improvements users often notice in areas like contrast and flare control.
Whether it’s worth it depends on how you shoot. If you often handhold in lower light, use teleconverters, or want the best all-around performance, the IS II is the stronger choice. If you usually shoot with fast shutter speeds, good light, or support such as a monopod/tripod, the older non-IS lens can still be a reasonable option.
A middle ground is a used first-generation 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, which may offer stabilization for less than the IS II. Another alternative is the 70-200mm f/4 IS if you value stabilization and lower weight more than f/2.8.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II vs 70-200mm f/2.8L USM for wedding photography
How much better are Canon Mark II L lenses than the original versions?
Canon vs Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 for weddings: how much does IS matter, and is Canon worth the extra cost?
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM vs EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM: which is the better choice?
Choosing a telephoto lens for bird and wildlife photography with a Canon 600D