Hey guys, I was just curious if anyone has used the Canon 70-200 f2.8 for video shooting?
I have the 100mm 2.8 macro, and was thinking of getting the 200mm 2.8 for even more depth of field for waist up and head shots for film making.

Any advice is appreciated! (Probably get the Version I, has better bokah then Version 2 I hear.)

Not to immediately derail your thread, but how do you like the 100 L??? That was going to be my next purchase.

The 100mm is awesome, I love it, and the macro is amazing!
I have the 24mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4 100mm 2.8 macro, and the 70-300 4.5-5.6 All Canon Lenses.

Check out this shot here someone photographed with the 200mm 2.8 - the background with bokah is awesome! I can do some stuff like that with the 100mm but 200mm at 2.8 is like twice the bokah!

Beach Sunset Portrait (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Pictures/Picture.aspx?Picture=2010-09-04_18-58-19)

Gallery of 200mm 2.8 images
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens Sample Pictures (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Gallery/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens.aspx)

Canon 70-200mm is a pretty common lens to shoot video with nowadays. The image-stabilized version is a must. Put that right on a tripod head and you've got rock solid telephoto.

Have used both I and II versions and like the II version better based on usability. The newer II version just felt smoother and easier to shoot with - I was even able to pull off smooth zooms while shooting a stage show.

Expensive though - might be cheaper to rent. I know I can get one for about $50/day.

A friend of mine uses it for corporate videos with great results.

We just got one at my workplace. The IS rocks. I had shot a previous company meeting with my 200/2.8L II (no IS), and it was really difficult to control the tripod without introducing noticeable vibrations. And when the vibrations were smooth enough that the audience wouldn't notice - I still noticed the wiggle.

Using the 70-200/2.8L IS II, the shots were silky smooth. It removes yet one more issue that can pull the audience out of the story.

The focus ring could have more throw, but I can't complain. It feels better than any of my other Canon lens focus rings, including the EF 100/2.8 and the EF 200/2.8L II. It's no Zeiss ZE 85/1.4 though.

Of course, the optics are excellent. My 200L is wonderfully sharp, and based on 3rd party reviews, the 70-200 II is even sharper.

Another lens to consider is the EF 135/2L. It's cheaper, faster, as sharp, and has a longer throw focus ring. It lacks IS though. If you have nice grip gear and are shooting for yourself, this is a lens to consider. (It's the baby brother to my 200L.) If you are shooting paid gigs, I'd go for the 70-200. IS lowers the risk of getting some shake that makes the client unhappy. According to my son, every 5D2 shoot he has done in LA has included the 70-200 with IS.

I should also mention that I used to own the EF 70-300 4.5-5.6 IS. I sold it to get the 200/2.8L II. The 200L simply kills the 70-300 for sharpness and clarity. I was especially displeased with the 70-300 on wildlife photos. The fur of a rabbit or deer on the 70-300 would look crunchy, digital, distorted, and generally unpleasant. With the 200L, it has that wonderful combination of sharpness and creaminess. I have yet to shoot wildlife with the 70-200L, but I would be surprised if it didn't match or surpass the 200L in quality.

This shows the sharpness of the 70-200L. Roll over to see the 200L. Frankly, I think he had a bad copy of the prime. And I might have had a bad copy of the 70-300 IS. In any case, the 70-200 looks fantastic.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens Image Quality (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=245&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0)

It's a solid all-around great performer. I got mine for $1,800 in Bangkok a few years ago. Still sells for $2,600 in Japan. Normally Mt Fuji is buried behind a haze, but Sunday it was rather clear, so I grabbed the 7D and 70-200 f2.8L and got this shot. I think I need a Zacuto lens finder, I was left trusting the auto focus due to the glare off my LCD. Get the lens, you won't regret it.

Mark

Hey Silas,

I shoot with the 70-200 2.8L non-IS a lot. You do need sticks under it most of the time, and it is sensitive to vibration if locked off, at the tele end. But I've had lots of great stuff from 70-135 and above. A friend just bought the IS version, so I should try it to compare.

Lots of opinions and good info about the 70-200mm F2.8 Canon lens (with or without IS) on here. A few example threads worth reading linked below in related EOS forum areas.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-7d-hd/500568-70-200-l-series-2-8-a.html

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-7d-hd/493265-canon-70-200mm-2-8-a.html

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-7d-hd/491258-image-stabilization.html

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-60d-rebel-t2i-eos-550d-hd/498433-does-image-stabilization-work-when-shooting-movies.html

There are many more threads - searching around the various EOS forums can link you to 10+ further good threads in seconds....but this will certainly get you started!

Bottom line, lots of people use the 70-200mm F2.8 Canon lens for video, with or without IS. Personally, I think IS is a must. Have fun choosing!

Sounds like

1) the 70-200mm is something that would be very useful for film making

2) unless the lens has IS its not any good for handheld, (I have the 100mm macro without IS and yes you need a tripod for that, so I can see the need for IS)

Now - I'll just have to figure out a way to justify the costs!

Now - I'll just have to figure out a way to justify the costs!

That's always the trick isn't it.....

Sounds like

1) the 70-200mm is something that would be very useful for film making

2) unless the lens has IS its not any good for handheld, (I have the 100mm macro without IS and yes you need a tripod for that, so I can see the need for IS)

Now - I'll just have to figure out a way to justify the costs!

Silas,

I'd be very surprised if you could handhold the lens for video at 200mm even with IS. Especially on the 5d with rolling shutter. It might work with a shoulder rig but I'd be interested to hear other experiences when handholding this lens shooting video.

1) the 70-200mm is something that would be very useful for film making

2) unless the lens has IS its not any good for handheld, (I have the 100mm macro without IS and yes you need a tripod for that, so I can see the need for IS)


3) IS is important even on a tripod. It reduces micro-vibrations, keeping the image sharper and more attractive. Without IS, you need an excellent tripod and you still need a light touch.

Regarding handheld... I once shot a bullfight with the 200L and 2x extender handheld. No bull. ;) First, I set the shutter speed to 1/400 or faster to eliminate motion blur. Second, the best footage is when the wall is not shown. The bull, the matadors, and the dirt are "organic", so they don't draw attention to the rolling shutter. I was seated, using a rig, and had my elbows on the railing. Focusing was hit and miss with the 5D2 and no follow focus. Only so much footage was good, but some was very good - aside from the brutality, of course.

In essence, a fast shutter speed reduces the need for IS - just like with photos. :)

3) IS is important even on a tripod. It reduces micro-vibrations, keeping the image sharper and more attractive. Without IS, you need an excellent tripod and you still need a light touch.


+1

IS is almost mandatory to use with sliders, especially manual ones. It also counteracts the effects of wind, when shooting exteriors.

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,

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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. :)

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.

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

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.

Bill
Thank you that's incredibly helpful
best
J

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

I use the 5D with the 70-200 all the time in run&gun situations (concerts) for years now, and never had any problem. It is certainly not too heavy to use handheld. The Canon bayonet is sturdy enough to take the weight.

I use the 5D with the 70-200 all the time in run&gun situations (concerts) for years now, and never had any problem. It is certainly not too heavy to use handheld. The Canon bayonet is sturdy enough to take the weight.

Luc,

Are you talking about shooting video or stills? I have a non-IS 70-200 2.8 and really can't shoot handheld video... not because of the weight, more because the images look bad, either jello, or shake. I shoot video with this lens an awful lot, but I always have it on sticks or a crane.