I own the 70-200 f/4 L and found that the tripod mounting ring for the
200mm f/2.8L II is identical to the one made specifically for my
70-200. The only difference is that it's black and not white. In my
mind, that is a no-brainer, especially when the black one costs $35
less at B&H ($78.95 vs $113.95).

Bill Hilton wrote:
From: "Scott"

I was browsing the L lenses, for fun, and noticed this 'accessory'
listed
for the 70-200 f/4 L. I can understand on the big honking lenses
the need
for a mid-point on which to attach the tripod, for balance, but this
lens is
a tiny thing. Is this a necessary item when using a tripod with
this lens?

It's about the same weight as the 75-300 IS (couple of ounces
heavier) ... you
don't *need* the tripod collar for it but sometimes it's convenient.
My wife
has this lens and we also have two other lenses that use the same
tripod collar
(400 f/5.6 L and 300 f/4 L), so we have access to a collar that fits.
If she's
putting a t/c on it or if she's using a gimbal head like the Sidekick
she
usually puts the collar on, if she's using other lenses without
collars so the
camera body has a tripod mount she usually doesn't bother.

I wouldn't pay the extra $150 or so for it, that's for sure.

Bill