Canon 70-200 f2.8 for Video?

[Buba Kastorski]

Canon 70-200 2.8 IS is one of the best canon lenses and one of my favorite, incredible image, and with IS on you CAN shoot hand held,
@ 200 mm! gives you not shaky, but that cinematic camera drift look,

[Jon Fairhurst]

I shot some handheld photos with the lens today with no rig - just the lens and body. With IS I was able to shoot at 200mm with speeds of 1/10 and 1/13 with a 100% hit rate. One was blurry due to subject motion, but that doesn't count. :) So yeah, that 4 stop IS claim is valid. Amazing.

[Brian David Melnyk]

i have the first 2.8 IS version and love it. i do find that there is some weirdness with IS on a tripod, if the camera is not being panned or tilted... it seems to create motion when there is none, a slight jittery movement.
Anyone else see this, and is it the same with version II?

[Jon Fairhurst]

Last week, I ran the new version on a tripod for a 1-1/2 event (in <12 minute segments, of course) using Mode 2 IS and it was rock solid.

[Wayne Avanson]

Brian, I have the 2.8 70-200 MkI as well and have the same issue with the IS on a tripod. I don't have it switched on when on a tripod at all now, when I stop panning or tilting, I want the camera to stop at the same time, not keep on readjusting itself for a second or so afterwards.

Incidentally, a mate of mine bought the F4 version, and I find his video shots consistently slightly sharper than my 2.8.

[Andy Wilkinson]

Regarding Wayne's comment "a mate of mine bought the F4 version, and I find his video shots consistently slightly sharper than my 2.8."

I can confirm this as well.

I have the Canon 70-200 F4 IS and have often borrowed my mates Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS (Version 1, not latest IS version). I find my F4 sharper too. It's also a lot less of a handful when walking around for extended periods. I can easily get very good video footage with it on a tripod or hand held, even at the long end. This is with my Canon 7D by the way, so factor in the 1.6x (he has 5DMkII). Impressive glass.

However, there are times when you really need that extra stop. That's when I borrow the F2.8 version.

[Jon Fairhurst]

I should also mention that the AF on the new version (I've never used the older version) is rocket fast. On our copy, it's very accurate as well. I own the EF 28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8, 200/2.8L II and have a 24-105/4L at work. The 70-200/2.8L II IS auto focus is noticeably faster than on all of those older, less expensive lenses. On the other lenses, my brain is a step ahead of the AF. I watch it get there and I can anticipate whether or not focus will lock. On the 70-200 it focuses before my brain registers it. (Maybe I'm just slow.)

It reminds me of that hand slapping game when you're getting beat. You put your hands out, Slap! You start to raise your hands again, Slap! You ask your opponent not to move until you say "go", Slap! "...you said 'go'":)

I haven't tried dynamic focus tracking yet, but if it's as good, sports shooters must love this thing.

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

I have not found IS to be worthwhile for most of my video work with a variety of Canon L lenses, especially any lenses beyond 135mm. With all telephoto lenses of 200mm or 300mm, I tend to always have it turned off if possible when shooting video. The Canon 300mm L IS is a lovely lens, and even though I sometimes take a stills shot with IS turned "on", it is always turned off for handheld or tripod shooting in video mode.

My most used optic during 2011 for video shoots with the 5D Mark II was the Canon 35-350mm L lens (which surprised me, because I'm a lover of fixed primes, so I thought that I'd hate it! How wrong I was). It is easily sharp enough for HD video, producing beautiful colour and film-like footage. As mentioned, I rarely use IS, so do not see a great need for IS on the later version Canon 28-300mm L IS.

A smooth video head on a sturdy tripod always produces smoother video clips combined with a non-IS lens (or IS lens turned 'off') compared to any handheld lens with IS turned on.

(Extreme wide lenses in the 15-35mm range can be hand held very easily to give smooth footage without IS, as long as an extra chimney finder is in place on the rear screen and then braced against the eye. This forms a natural 3-point trianglular brace between both hands and face).

If I need to film smooth-flowing footage on the move, then nothing beats a decent steadicam/steadycam unit combined with a wide-angle lens. (Or combined with my favourite shoulder/waist cinecam brace).

When I need to move around more than a tripod will allow, and not able to use or set-up a steadicam, then I will sometimes use a monopod (in preference to IS).

Even with a monopod, it can be very difficult to maintain steady footage using a medium to long telephoto lens, without the results of bumps and jerks in each sequence. So with this footage, during post-editing, I often need to run it through with proDad software, to convert the 5D shaky video into usuable clips.

IS also emits horrible added noise to any video when the sound recording source is in range of the lens.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Tony,

Have you tried the 70-200L II? It's nearly silent. By comparison, my first lens on the 5D2 was the 70-300/4-5.6 IS and it sounded like a cement mixer. The 24-105/4L IS is also fairly loud. I was in a fairly quiet meeting room the other day with the lens, and I had to put my ear close to the 70-200 to check if the IS was really working. I'm not sure how the older version of the lens compares.

Even at that level, I would want to avoid the IS sound for an on-camera mic in a quiet environment. It would be no problem with a boom or lav.

Regarding use on a tripod, at two recent events, I used a Vinten 3AS on aluminum legs and a floor spreader on carpet. (Yes, a mid spreader and spikes would give more stability.) Using my 200/2.8L, the vibration was very noticeable when I would touch the pan handle. At the second even with the 70-200, the lens is heavier and I tied a 10-lb weight to the tripod to add stability, so that would have already helped. I should have tried with IS off, but when I saw how nice it looked with IS Mode 2 on, I didn't bother with any comparisons.

When panning fast and stopping hard, I got a floating effect where the video overshot and came back like sloshing syrup. So avoid IS for whip pans. Fortunately, I was doing slow, smooth tracking of a public speaker. For this application, the pans were buttery smooth. When watching the video, I would critique my tracking technique, but was never distracted by unwanted motion. And I know that if I'm not distracted, the audience certainly won't be distracted.

Regarding smoothing the video in post, with a 1/50 or 1/60 shutter, you'll still have some motion blur. If you can get the camera stable (with IS and/or grip gear), it saves time and can potentially deliver a sharper image.

I should get a mid-level spreader, use more weight, and do a comparison of IS and non IS. If the tripod can deliver stability, no IS is needed; however, that's not always the case, for instance, in wind. You can always turn IS off, but you can never turn it on for a non-IS lens.

All that said, I'm primarily a primes guy. And I agree, up to 35mm on full frame, IS isn't needed at all. A decent shoulder rig and good technique does the trick.

[Denise Wall]

I have a 70-200 f2.8 non IS but I've never used it for video. I use the new 70-200IS f4 with my 7D and it's amazing. Tripod or handheld. I can shoot steady, handheld video at 200 with it. Plus it's not so big or heavy. I rarely need the extra stop with video shutter speeds. Sometimes with stills I need the 2.8. Both are great lenses.

[Scott Bellefeuille]

One thing to keep in mind when using the 70-200 IS MKII is that it is almost too sharp for video. The sharpness and resolving power can amplify moire and have too much of an 'edge' which can make the video look less filmic. Experiment with different picture profiles and sharpening turned completely off to find what works best for your style of shooting. Other than that it is a gorgeous lens and the IS is a truly a godsend when shooting video!

[Jon Fairhurst]

I'm looking forward to receiving the Mosaic Engineering anti aliasing filter for the 5D2. I would think that it will remove the overly sharp (aliased) video look. I expect that with the filter, no lens will be too sharp. :)

[Don Miller]

The F4 version of the 70-200 is very sharp too, and considerably smaller and less expensive.
I have fast primes (in this range the 85/1.2 and the 135/2), so I have f4 zooms. Without the primes I would buy 2.8 zooms.
As far as the many Canon70-300 lens models, the newest most expensive white lens is very good. As an alternative the 1.4 TC works very well on all 70-200.
It's beneficial to consider the whole kit. For the 5D sensor size a two lens kit of the 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 is hard to beat.

[John Benton]

May be a silly question but is the 2.8 too big for the 5D?

[Bill Pryor]

It's not too big but you should use the tripod mount on the lens collar or at least a lens support on your rig's rails. That's why I got the older f4 version. It's light enough to not have to worry about that. The IS is irrelevant for me because I do almost all video, and anything over about 35mm needs to be on a tripod anyway, and you don't use IS on a tripod unless you're not making any move.