I am ready to buy the mid-tele zoom but not sure which one. I owned the Mark I before and mainly used it on 5D for wedding, portrait, animals and landscape. I like the lens for the purposes. My Mark I performed well and sharp in general. Wide-open sharpness is okay tho it's not the best 70-200/2.8 lens I had used. Some PP sharpening took care most of the slight f/2.8 softness issues with that lens. I paid about $1400 for it. I have sold it together with my 5D couple years ago.
For those of you who upgraded from 70-200/2.8L IS Mark I to Mark II version, how many of you think the upgrade really worth the extra $1000? I will use it on 7D for the same purpose I used it before, i.e. wedding, animals, portrait and landscape.
But given the big jump of the price tag, any of you upgraders think the Mark I just presents a bigger overall value than the mark II even with the improved sharpness, color and IS performance?
I am also considering to get the 70-200/4 L IS instead of the f/2.8 L IS Mark I for it's color and IS. Any f/2.8 L IS owner also owns the f/4 L IS version and like the f/4 L IS better?
Any thought willbe greatly apreciated!!!
sigh...which one I should get?
Thanks for your help...