Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 06 Aug 2010 (Friday) 02:18
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Debating on 70-200 IS USM f/2.8L Mark I or II

 
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,894 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Aug 06, 2010 12:37 |  #16

Whoa, whats this now? I know very little about video. Why is the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark I better for it?


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Canon ­ Bob
Goldmember
2,056 posts
Likes: 51
Joined May 2007
Location: Poitou-Charentes, France
     
Aug 06, 2010 13:37 |  #17

ben_r_ wrote in post #10673552 (external link)
Whoa, whats this now? I know very little about video. Why is the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark I better for it?

It's parfocal....ie, the focus doesn't change as you zoom in or out.....a useful feature for video and I doubt that the resolution of video will show the difference between the MkI and MKII

Bob


1Dx2 (2), 5DSR, 1Ds3, 1D4, 5D2(590nm), 5D2(720nm) EF600 EF400 EF300-II EF300 EF200 EF200-II EF180L EF135L EF100 EF85-II EF50L TS-E17/4 TS-E24L-II TS-E45 TS-E90 MP-E65 EF70-200-II EF24-70/2.8-II EF16-35/4 EF8-15/4 EF11-24/4 Zeiss 15/2.8 21/2.8 25/2 28/2 35/1.4 35/2 50/2 85/1.4 100/2 135/2 T/C's L-SC & a WIFE!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hhuy888
Goldmember
Avatar
1,002 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Mar 2010
     
Aug 06, 2010 13:37 |  #18

BoneJj wrote in post #10673458 (external link)
That's pretty cool, I didn't know about that fact. That could be useful for both video and general shooting as well for the way I find myself shooting a lot.

I do tend to do video from time to time of friends and family gatherings and all. I wouldn't mind doing some more video but right now my kit lens just doesn't do all that well for that.... The 70-300 is usm that I have is pretty good for video but I really need to move to the f/2.8 and I need the IS for the motion shots that I do at the race track and so on.

I get some really nice shots with it as it is now but I could really use the 2.8 to set the subjects apart more from the rest.

I'm kind of leaning to the mark I at this point. It would be nice to save a few bucks and then buy some other gear like more strobes and such.

If you are leaning toward saving money for other stuff and buying mk I, then go for it. It is still a great lens. I sold my six month old mk I for $1650 a few months ago. If you buy one at similar condition and price. You still get about 8 months of warranty and save even more.


hhuy
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stan43
Goldmember
Avatar
1,206 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Louisville KY
     
Aug 06, 2010 14:04 |  #19

This has temporarilty replaced the 24-70 vs 24-105 debate. Get the MK2 if you can aford it. It's a better lens that will produce better pictures given the same user.


Canon: 5DSr,5Dmk3,1DXmk2 5d MK4,11-24L,35L,70-200 2.8L2,24-105L,24-70L,Sigma 24-105 Art,50 1.4 Art,Tamron SP85 1.8,Tamron SP90 Macro. Zeiss 135 F2 Milvus
Pentax 645Z,90 2.8 Macro,55 2.8,24-48 . Fuji: EX2,XT1,14mm,18-55,56,55-200,Zeis Touit 2.8 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,238 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 268
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Aug 06, 2010 14:17 |  #20

I don't think either the 70-200mm 2.8 IS or the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II are Parfocal. They both have exactly the same warning about zooming in the manual:

IMAGE: http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo3/_1-13.jpg

Mike Sowsun / S110 / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 18-135mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jayadeff
Senior Member
367 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Salinas, CA
     
Aug 06, 2010 14:58 |  #21

If you're going to be shooting a lot at f/2.8, get the MkII version because it's a lot sharper than the first version at f/2.8. But if you think you'll rarely, or never be shooting at f/2.8, get the 70-200 f/4L IS instead. It's amazingly sharp at f/4 and cheaper than the original 2.8L IS version. I'd pass on the original 2.8L IS. Every copy I've ever tried (rented, owned, or borrowed) was really soft at f/2.8 and a big disappointment.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BoneJj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,269 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
     
Aug 07, 2010 00:56 |  #22

jayadeff wrote in post #10674270 (external link)
If you're going to be shooting a lot at f/2.8, get the MkII version because it's a lot sharper than the first version at f/2.8. But if you think you'll rarely, or never be shooting at f/2.8, get the 70-200 f/4L IS instead. It's amazingly sharp at f/4 and cheaper than the original 2.8L IS version. I'd pass on the original 2.8L IS. Every copy I've ever tried (rented, owned, or borrowed) was really soft at f/2.8 and a big disappointment.

yeah, 2.8 is my target f-stop, so yeah I might just have to spend the outrageous amount and get the mark II.

Kind of sucks but I guess I'll just have to work with it.


--Bone | FSS (external link) | flickr (external link) | Gear list (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Aug 07, 2010 03:33 |  #23

BoneJj wrote in post #10671527 (external link)
yeah i get that but is the difference in model really worth the difference in price or is the difference in model only marginally better compared?

The mk2 is well worth the extra.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Daedalus34r
Senior Member
477 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Aug 09, 2010 10:17 |  #24

jayadeff wrote in post #10674270 (external link)
If you're going to be shooting a lot at f/2.8, get the MkII version because it's a lot sharper than the first version at f/2.8. But if you think you'll rarely, or never be shooting at f/2.8, get the 70-200 f/4L IS instead. It's amazingly sharp at f/4 and cheaper than the original 2.8L IS version. I'd pass on the original 2.8L IS. Every copy I've ever tried (rented, owned, or borrowed) was really soft at f/2.8 and a big disappointment.

+1

also, if you are willing to spend $1900 on a lens, might as well pony up $400 more for the mk2


BODY :: EOS 7D, EOS 50D
GLASS :: 17-55 f/2.8 , 50 f/1.4 , 70-200 f/4L IS, 150 f/2.8 EX Macro , 10-20 f/4-5.6 EX , 30 f/1.4 EX
EXTRAS :: 430EX II , Kata R-103 Bag , Tenba Messenger Bag :: WISH LIST :: 100 f/2
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro Review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BoneJj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,269 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
     
Aug 09, 2010 11:36 |  #25

Daedalus34r wrote in post #10687413 (external link)
+1

also, if you are willing to spend $1900 on a lens, might as well pony up $400 more for the mk2

yeah, now i just need to sell my extra car so that I can get the lens.... lol

anyone in southwest florida want to buy a 91 toyota mr2 with the t-tops and manual trans? lol


--Bone | FSS (external link) | flickr (external link) | Gear list (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hairy_moth
Goldmember
Avatar
3,739 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 12
Joined Apr 2009
Location: NJ
     
Aug 09, 2010 11:45 |  #26

Have you considered the band new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM for Canon (external link) ? ($1699 at B&H (external link)).

This thing, announced in February, just became available last week. It is so new that I have not been able to find any hands on reviews yet.

Given the $1700 price for a Sigma, Sigma Marketing would be absolute morons if their own internal tests did not show that this lens clearly outperforms the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (external link). In fact, I suspect it will come very close (or exceed) the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM (external link).

I am planning on buying a 70-200 f/2.8 in the next few weeks. I am waiting to see some reviews and images from this lens before making my final decision.


7D | 300D | G1X | Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 | EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro | EF 85mm f/1.8 | 70-200 f/2.8L MkII -- flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BoneJj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,269 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
     
Aug 09, 2010 11:50 |  #27

hairy_moth wrote in post #10687993 (external link)
Have you considered the band new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM for Canon (external link) ? ($1699 at B&H (external link)).

This thing, announced in February, just became available last week. It is so new that I have not been able to find any hands on reviews yet.

Given the $1700 price for a Sigma, Sigma Marketing would be absolute morons if their own internal tests did not show that this lens clearly outperforms the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (external link). In fact, I suspect it will come very close (or exceed) the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM (external link).

my concern here is the quality control though. I have the sigma dirty 30, and I'm still in the process of sending it back and forth to get it fixed so my fast end is actually focusing right.. right now it's quite a bit off.


--Bone | FSS (external link) | flickr (external link) | Gear list (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nonick
Goldmember
1,588 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: NYC
     
Aug 09, 2010 13:03 |  #28

mark II is the right choice. I am amazed by sharpness of the pictures it took. My mk I was a good copy tho I don't think it's sharper, faster nor had better color/contrast than my old minolta 70-200G ssm @ 2.8.

But MkII is just better and best in everything. Period. For $400 more, the difference is just 20%. I would say it's well worth every penny.


Gear|Searching for 7DII, Buying 5DIII 35L II, 24-70 2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AxxisPhoto
Goldmember
Avatar
1,893 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
     
Aug 10, 2010 11:26 |  #29

Both are great lenses. I'm very happy with my Mk I.


Web: AxxisPhoto (external link)
Tumblr: Tumblr (external link)
Flickr: AxxisPhoto (external link)
Web: Erotiklab (external link)(NSFW)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Aug 10, 2010 11:54 |  #30

AxxisPhoto wrote in post #10694691 (external link)
Both are great lenses. I'm very happy with my Mk I.

I agree, I had a mk1 for 5 years and loved it, the mk1 is a great lens and the mk2 is a stunning lens.:D


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,603 views & 0 likes for this thread
Debating on 70-200 IS USM f/2.8L Mark I or II
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is AlexRapp
1204 guests, 287 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.