Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM Lens LOWEST PRICE EVER £787.89 @ Amazon
566°Expired

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM Lens LOWEST PRICE EVER £787.89 @ Amazon

£787.89Amazon Deals
51
Found 14th Apr 2015
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM Lens £787.89 @ Amazon. This is it's lowest price ever by over £100. This lens has never been under £900 before and now it's yours for less than £800. Obviously it's not going to appeal to everyone but this is a great lens, with great reviews at a great price and that's what HUKD is all about.

51 Comments

Excellent. I've got the Mark II F2.8 IS version. Got it from John Lewis during a price mix up for £929.

Brilliant lens and this is too for the price.

Amazing price...I see that its not the IS version.. so not really an amazing price after all..
Edited by: "afroylnt" 14th Apr 2015

WOW ! If I still used by Canon gear I would be all over this. Brilliant price for a great piece of glass.

mindpalace

(Image)



I don't think this is an image of the offer lens, which doesn't have IS - and this is important for some buyers.

Original Poster

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Review/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens.jpg

Original Poster

dilbertov

I don't think this is an image of the offer lens, which doesn't have IS - … I don't think this is an image of the offer lens, which doesn't have IS - and this is important for some buyers.



Is that better?

any good deal for a cheaper Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens?

hot but still to expensive for me...

I paid just under this for the f4 IS so amazing price

Canon just reduced all its lens prices in the US. Did that happen here too? Haven't had time to check.

(As this has no IS, it's needs a tripod, which restricts its usefulness, imo)

I use Nikon for sports and rarely turn on the VR (VR/Vibration Reduction = IS/Internal Stabilisation). Shooting wide open and with the ISO capabilities of any modern DSLR outside I don't need it. If you are inside using ambient light and hand-held it might be different. I see people with F/4 using a mono-pod occasionally at night under poor lights.

lmosciszko

any good deal for a cheaper Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens?hot but … any good deal for a cheaper Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens?hot but still to expensive for me...


I am same , Think amazon de is cheapest about £420

f2.8 its great lens, but they are simple to heavy for normal use, f4 non is and is are very similar, the bigest problem in photography is that the object are moving and is is not helping with this at all, but non is is that fast that have no problem (iq from canon) with shaking hands....i know 2-3 people using f4 and they dont have tripods...

Almost had a heart attack thinking it was the IS version which is actually £1,529.17. Snoopy18 post link to it on amazon.de - I can't find it for £420.

Its okay I've found it:

amazon.de/Can…F6T

DistortedVision

Almost had a heart attack thinking it was the IS version which is … Almost had a heart attack thinking it was the IS version which is actually £1,529.17. Snoopy18 post link to it on amazon.de - I can't find it for £420.


amazon fr have it for 551 euro

Cant wait to see my next door neighbours face.... luckily she wont see me looking now thanks to the zoom on this little puppy!

RCUK

Cant wait to see my next door neighbours face.... luckily she wont see me … Cant wait to see my next door neighbours face.... luckily she wont see me looking now thanks to the zoom on this little puppy!



Stranger danger

RCUK

Cant wait to see my next door neighbours face.... luckily she wont see me … Cant wait to see my next door neighbours face.... luckily she wont see me looking now thanks to the zoom on this little puppy!


I was surprised that 210mm on APS-C isn't all that much of a zoom as you might expect. You'll have to crop to get her face to fill the frame, but I'm guessing that's not what you were after a picture of

lmosciszko

amazon fr have it for 551 euro



no they don't it's €1120

craig816

no they don't it's €1120



lol, yes they do.
They were talking about F 4.0 not 2.8. Read all comments not just random one

novak100

lol, yes they do.They were talking about F 4.0 not 2.8. Read all comments … lol, yes they do.They were talking about F 4.0 not 2.8. Read all comments not just random one



oops sorry - for a moment I got excited about the f2.8 for €551!

Nice to see a premium product getting some deserved heat on this site.

omg £200 cheaper wow
but what a shame, i using Nikon
Edited by: "JC1997" 14th Apr 2015

My understanding is that unless you need f2.8, then the f4 version of this has better image quality and is lighter and more portable.

LondonLass

I use Nikon for sports and rarely turn on the VR (VR/Vibration Reduction … I use Nikon for sports and rarely turn on the VR (VR/Vibration Reduction = IS/Internal Stabilisation). Shooting wide open and with the ISO capabilities of any modern DSLR outside I don't need it. If you are inside using ambient light and hand-held it might be different. I see people with F/4 using a mono-pod occasionally at night under poor lights.


Fine if you dont mind grainier, poorer quality shots. If i was dropping nearly 8 ton on a piece of glass i would find compromising iso out of the question. I would want sharp, clear shots. Each to their own, though

markross

My understanding is that unless you need f2.8, then the f4 version of … My understanding is that unless you need f2.8, then the f4 version of this has better image quality and is lighter and more portable.




from the experience more profesional photographers. 2.8 is perfect for indoor photos,. f4 is best lens for that price for outdoor/portrait and as a "walk around lens"

ewanyengi

Fine if you dont mind grainier, poorer quality shots. If i was dropping … Fine if you dont mind grainier, poorer quality shots. If i was dropping nearly 8 ton on a piece of glass i would find compromising iso out of the question. I would want sharp, clear shots. Each to their own, though



But with sports your shutter speed would need to be high enough to freeze the action and avoid blur anyway, with VR or without.

For anyone who is interested, After a week of searching I just bought the Canon 70-200 L is lol for 1799 euros from Saturn. Lowest price I could find

a2tmfk

For anyone who is interested, After a week of searching I just bought the … For anyone who is interested, After a week of searching I just bought the Canon 70-200 L is lol for 1799 euros from Saturn. Lowest price I could find


Is ll

Damn it.. I thought fate was looking at me. Not the version I'd like. :-|

lmosciszko

from the experience more profesional photographers. 2.8 is perfect for … from the experience more profesional photographers. 2.8 is perfect for indoor photos,. f4 is best lens for that price for outdoor/portrait and as a "walk around lens"



Perhaps 2.0, 1.8 or 1.4 might be more perfect. Choosing 2.8 is just a compromise of price/performance to achieve the subject isolation/background blur/depth of focus that suits the shoot.

And for a "walk around lens" most people would turn to something a little physically smaller than even an F4. Nifty 50 perhaps? Or one of those everything to everyone lenses such as 18-200?

twist

But with sports your shutter speed would need to be high enough to freeze … But with sports your shutter speed would need to be high enough to freeze the action and avoid blur anyway, with VR or without.


If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about compromising ISO, which has nothing to do with shutter speed. In lower light you wont be able to take fast shutter speed shots without compromising the ISO which will make for inferior shots. It sounds like you are confusing grainier higher ISO shots with blurred shots from slower shutter speed which are completely unrelated though it sounded clever. In either case you dont seem to know what you are talking about. Like i said, grainier shots for 8 ton, not for me

ewanyengi

If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about … If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about compromising ISO, which has nothing to do with shutter speed. In lower light you wont be able to take fast shutter speed shots without compromising the ISO which will make for inferior shots. It sounds like you are confusing grainier higher ISO shots with blurred shots from slower shutter speed which are completely unrelated though it sounded clever. In either case you dont seem to know what you are talking about. Like i said, grainier shots for 8 ton, not for me



Is the higher iso an issue on a good dslr nowadays .
I thought my new 6d was supposed to handle it no problem

ewanyengi

If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about … If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about compromising ISO, which has nothing to do with shutter speed. In lower light you wont be able to take fast shutter speed shots without compromising the ISO which will make for inferior shots. It sounds like you are confusing grainier higher ISO shots with blurred shots from slower shutter speed which are completely unrelated though it sounded clever. In either case you dont seem to know what you are talking about. Like i said, grainier shots for 8 ton, not for me


erm... sharp and slightly grainy shots are better than blurry 100iso ones!

Someone find me a deal on the 2.8 IS And I'll be sold lol :-). Been looking for months but just can't quite justify the cost good price on this though but I really want IS

Wish i could afford it. Good deal tho.

brilly

erm... sharp and slightly grainy shots are better than blurry 100iso ones!


Fill your boots with your grainy 800 quid shots. Not for me

ewanyengi

Fill your boots with your grainy 800 quid shots. Not for me


fill your recycle bin with your low iso blurry messes!

if you want to use this lens to shoot a static image then fine, stabilisation is great
'most' use these types for moving subjects though dont they?

as for 'dont know what you are talking about' thats obviously the case for you as you cant understand both arguments

ewanyengi

If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about … If you read what i actually said you will see i was talking about compromising ISO, which has nothing to do with shutter speed. In lower light you wont be able to take fast shutter speed shots without compromising the ISO which will make for inferior shots. It sounds like you are confusing grainier higher ISO shots with blurred shots from slower shutter speed which are completely unrelated though it sounded clever. In either case you dont seem to know what you are talking about. Like i said, grainier shots for 8 ton, not for me



The op said they dont really need vr for sport, which is true, to freeze the action in sport your shutter will be fast enough to handhold and avoid camera shake! VR won't make a difference at 1/500 to 1/1000 a sec. Youre the one that has a lot to learn.

twist

The op said they dont really need vr for sport, which is true, to freeze … The op said they dont really need vr for sport, which is true, to freeze the action in sport your shutter will be fast enough to handhold and avoid camera shake! VR won't make a difference at 1/500 to 1/1000 a sec. Youre the one that has a lot to learn.


Im not interested in sport pictures and was talking about compromising iso. Im talking for me. Whatever anybody else wants to do is up to them. Its not fit for MY purpose. This is non negotiable and absolute.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text