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

I was faced with the same decision a few weeks ago. I bit the bullet and went with the mk II. After viewing the results I have absolutely no regrets.

I would love to upgrade to a MKII but just don't have the money. That being said the MKI was considered "standard equipment" for years for photojournalists, wedding photographers who feed their kids with the images they sell. If buying new then yeah the MKII is worth waiting and saving for but to deny yourself the quality & utility of this focal length because you can't swing a MKII is crazy.

It was the standard lens because it was the only game in town, no disrespect to Sigma

mk1 is still a fantastic lens

if you can handle the price i'd say mkII hands down.

ecub wrote in post #10671543
True, $400 is allot of money, but since you're already spending at least $1900, an extra $400 isn't much when you think of it. Plus that extra $400 gives you better quality lens.

aaronmd wrote in post #10671973
it is easy to justify the extra $400

Daedalus34r wrote in post #10687413
if you are willing to spend $1900 on a lens, might as well pony up $400 more for the mk2

So Canon marketing has proven effective. The MkI was $1700 until the MkII was released. Very few would shell out an extra $800, making it out of reach to most but close enough to drool. So bump up the price of the MkI, sell the first shipment of MkIIs at MSRP, and then drop the price on the MkII. Now it's "only" $400 more. There is no denying the MkII is a FANTASTIC lens, you just have to determine whether you need it. The advantages are known, but it's worth is subjective. Compare the 55-250 to the 70-200 2.8, and you will notice very little difference in image quality, given the same settings. I opted for the MkI because it cost me just enough to hurt me ($1500). The MkII would have dang near crippled me. Chances are if you are debating, you will be happy with the MkI.

Overread wrote in post #10671907
They put a high price on it though because it gets the searchers in from google and then they can suggest the Mk2 which is in stock and which is only a few 100 more for a fully upgraded lens.

Interesting.

Before the Mark II existed, I had an excuse to own the 200mm f/2.8L II lens for compactness. Now I have no excuse to own that lens because the Mk II wide open beats the prime hands down.

bkdc wrote in post #10707853
Before the Mark II existed, I had an excuse to own the 200mm f/2.8L II lens for compactness. Now I have no excuse to own that lens because the Mk II wide open beats the prime hands down.

And thats why I just sold my 200f2.8Lmk2

bspawr wrote in post #10694959
I was faced with the same decision a few weeks ago. I bit the bullet and went with the mk II. After viewing the results I have absolutely no regrets.

I wasn't faced with the decision, I just went ahead and bit the bullet.

I always knew I was going to get the mk II. I just had to justify the difference in price to my wife. Hence the 'decision'!

I sold my MKI and my 135L to get the MKII and I have owned the F4 IS, magic drainpipe, and the 2.8 non IS, and the 2.8 IS.

I loved the magic drainpipe the color rendition was so nice that when I upgraded to the non IS I felt it was missing some of that so onto the MKI and even though it was very good I still felt it lacking in the color rendition and sharpness compared to the Magic drainpipe.

But when I read reviews comparing the MKII to the drainpipe in these categories I considered it a must and let me tell you it was all true. This lense is truly amazing.

Don't get me wrong the MKI is very capable but it falls a little short compared to the MKII.

FWIW I am seriously thinking about selling my Mark I with my 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 to fund the upgrade to the Mark II! We'll see what I do, but I really like what Im seeing about and from the Mark II.

ben_r_ wrote in post #10709205
FWIW I am seriously thinking about selling my Mark I with my 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 to fund the upgrade to the Mark II! We'll see what I do, but I really like what Im seeing about and from the Mark II.

You will love it im sure.

Aside from a couple of quick test shots in a shop, I have not used the MkI, but the MkII makes me smile every time I use it and even more so when looking at the images.

The SOC results are awesome TBQFH. I regularly don't bother with any PP at all.

An example of the detail when coupled with a 5DII:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/monk3y/48876115​44

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/monk3y/48870081​65

The MKII looks like it would be worth it in your situation. I've been thinking about upgrading to the MKII but I got my MKI for just under $1,300 so I don't think it's worth it. Rather get some other glass instead.