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 18 Nov 2011 (Friday) 23:33
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 F2.8 which verision?

 
KenYork
Hatchling
6 posts
Joined Mar 2008
     
Nov 20, 2011 21:12 |  #16

Rocky Rhode wrote in post #13422352 (external link)
Unless you know that you must have the MK II, take a look at the Sigma OS.
85% of the IQ at 60% of the cost. I love mine

I also have the Sigma OS. Definitely worth to as least check out.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Trowski
Member
85 posts
Joined Feb 2011
     
Nov 20, 2011 21:49 |  #17

If you can afford it, go with the Canon 70-200mm II. Other options are quite nice, but most trade some compromise in image quality for reduced price.


- Trowski

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hensgonwild
Member
132 posts
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Monterey Park/La Jolla, CA
     
Nov 21, 2011 05:46 |  #18

if you have the money, definitely go for the mkII. if you dont like used glass, definitely go for the mkII. mkI is great already, but mkII is like gold. im satisfied with my mkI and didnt mind it being used, but i also did save about a ton of money.



Gear: Canon 60D || Sigma 18-50 f2.8 Macro || Canon 55-250 f4-5.6 || Canon Macro 100 f2.8 L IS || Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS || Speedlite 430EX II
Feedback-Lowepro NOVA 180AW

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJG1
Senior Member
Avatar
555 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Feb 2009
     
Nov 21, 2011 05:49 |  #19

IS MkII.....it's incredible!


Flick (external link)r - www.guytonphotographic​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AzzA
Senior Member
Avatar
830 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Hants, UK
     
Nov 21, 2011 07:31 |  #20

AJG1 wrote in post #13429770 (external link)
IS MkII.....it's incredible!

What he said.

Just got my hands on a 70-200 F2.8 IS MkII. Had played with an old Sigma, hired a MkI. Bought a MkII. It's a very nice bit of kit - just need to work out how to pay for it now :oops::D


Canon EOS 40D x2 (Sold both 20D and 30D :cry:) & Canon EOS 7D
Canon 100-400 L, Canon 24-105 F4 L, Canon 50 F1.8 & Sigma 10-20. Would like 70-200 L F2.8 IS...
www.AE-Photography.co.uk (external link) :eek: www.MotorsportPhotos.n​et (external link) :cool: www.MotorsportVideos.n​et (external link) ;)
http://www.facebook.co​m/AEPhotographyUK/ (external link) :rolleyes:
http://www.twitter.com​/Az_Edwards/ (external link) :rolleyes:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
muskyhunter
Goldmember
Avatar
1,137 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 21, 2011 09:46 |  #21

Here are my suggestions

1. Canon 70-200mm f2.8 mk2 (most expensive BEST opticically)
2. Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS (can be had for $1300-1500 new with 6-10 year warranty). 85-90% of image quality.
3. Canon 70-200mm f2.8 mk1 (can be had for $1300-1400 used). I would say the image quality is on par with the Sigma and about 85-90% of the mk2.

Another thing to consider is if you need weather sealing. The mk2 is the one to get if you do.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jack880
Goldmember
Avatar
2,845 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 736
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Manchester, UK
     
Nov 21, 2011 15:13 |  #22

I love my 2.8 IS mk1... Got it really cheap off ebay... Is it that bad compared to the mk2??


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/jackhenriques/ (external link)
1DX, 7D, 20D, G7X II, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 24-70 f/2.8 L, 16-35 f/2.8 L II, 50 f/1.8 II, 50 f/1.4, TS-E 17 f/4 L, 8-15 f/4 L, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, Sigma 8-16 f/4.5-5.6, Sigma 150 f/2.8 macro, x1.4 extender II, Kenko extension tubes, 430 EX II x 2, DJI Mavic Air

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
argyle
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,187 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
     
Nov 21, 2011 16:05 |  #23

jack880 wrote in post #13431833 (external link)
I love my 2.8 IS mk1... Got it really cheap off ebay... Is it that bad compared to the mk2??

No, not at all in my opinion. But most folks that spend $2000+ for the latest and greatest will sometimes resort to a bit of hyperbole to rationalize the expense. :D Frankly, I just haven't seen enough of a compelling reason to "upgrade" from my Mk I...plenty sharp, even wide open.


"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son". - Dean Wormer

GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jack880
Goldmember
Avatar
2,845 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 736
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Manchester, UK
     
Nov 21, 2011 16:07 |  #24

yep, good point!


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/jackhenriques/ (external link)
1DX, 7D, 20D, G7X II, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 24-70 f/2.8 L, 16-35 f/2.8 L II, 50 f/1.8 II, 50 f/1.4, TS-E 17 f/4 L, 8-15 f/4 L, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8, Sigma 8-16 f/4.5-5.6, Sigma 150 f/2.8 macro, x1.4 extender II, Kenko extension tubes, 430 EX II x 2, DJI Mavic Air

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Nov 21, 2011 16:55 |  #25

jack880 wrote in post #13431833 (external link)
I love my 2.8 IS mk1... Got it really cheap off ebay... Is it that bad compared to the mk2??

I got a mk1 a good few years ago, it got a hell of a lot of use and loved it, mine was very sharp wide open, then I got a 300f2.8Lis and stopped using the 70-200 so I sold it and got the F4Lis and it was sharper than my 70-200f2.8 things changed and found myself needing 2.8 again so I got a mk2 at a good price and it blew me away but that does not make the mk1 a bad lens, I sold my mk1 long before the mk2 was out and got a good price for it, infact I lost no money on it so the upgrade never cost a lot, so go enjoy your mk1 its still a great lens.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick5
Goldmember
Avatar
3,107 posts
Likes: 195
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
     
Nov 21, 2011 21:59 |  #26

70-200 f/2.8 L IS II is as good as it gets.


Canon 5D Mark III (x2), BG-E11 Grips, 7D (x2) BG-E7 Grips, Canon Lenses 16-35 f/4 L IS, 17-40 f/4 L, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 70-200 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/4 L IS Version II, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS Version II, TS-E 24 f/3.5 L II, 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS, 10-22 f3.5-4.5, 17-55 f/2.8 L IS, 85 f/1.8, Canon 1.4 Extender III, 5 Canon 600 EX-RT, 2 Canon ST-E3 Transmitters, Canon Pixma PRO-10 Printer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sloanbj
Senior Member
Avatar
297 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
     
Nov 21, 2011 22:13 |  #27

There are significant trade-offs between quite a few metrics on all four Canon 70-200mm lenses:
1. Weight - IS and f2.8 add greatly to bulk and weight of the lenses
2. Cost - not such an issue over the long term perhaps, but IS and 2.8 cost significantly more
3. Image Quality - this is very subjective but usually favors the f4 lenses
4. Usability - indoor shooting argues for IS and f2.8, particularly on crop cameras where noise is an issue preventing ISO boosting

What everyone wants is a low-cost, light-weight lens which can capture any image at the desired bokeh. Until someone comes up with a new idea for imaging, we are sometimes stuck with heaps of heavy, complicated, expensive glass to get the images we desire.


Flickr (external link) 5Dii * Canon 50 * 85 * 17-40L * 24-105L * 180L * 100-400L * 580ex ii
Film: Contax | Rolleiflex | Pentax

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
iamawinner
Member
30 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Nov 24, 2011 18:03 |  #28

The MKII is obviously better than the MKI but is not worth the Price jump... No matter what the IS Is worth it so get at LEAST the MKI!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lifeinpictures
Member
220 posts
Joined Apr 2009
     
Nov 24, 2011 18:23 |  #29

muskyhunter wrote in post #13430384 (external link)
Here are my suggestions

1. Canon 70-200mm f2.8 mk2 (most expensive BEST opticically)
2. Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS (can be had for $1300-1500 new with 6-10 year warranty). 85-90% of image quality.
3. Canon 70-200mm f2.8 mk1 (can be had for $1300-1400 used). I would say the image quality is on par with the Sigma and about 85-90% of the mk2.

Another thing to consider is if you need weather sealing. The mk2 is the one to get if you do.

FYI

The canon 70-200 2.8 IS (first version) is weather sealed too. I had it for 4 years before I decided to upgrade to the Mark II.
In addition the Mark I is definitely better than the sigma offering and is pretty close to the Mark II.
The Mark II is very sharp at 2.8 and since I shoot at 2.8 a lot, I reluctantly decided to get the Mark II.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lifeinpictures
Member
220 posts
Joined Apr 2009
     
Nov 24, 2011 18:33 |  #30

sloanbj wrote in post #13433678 (external link)
There are significant trade-offs between quite a few metrics on all four Canon 70-200mm lenses:
1. Weight - IS and f2.8 add greatly to bulk and weight of the lenses
2. Cost - not such an issue over the long term perhaps, but IS and 2.8 cost significantly more
3. Image Quality - this is very subjective but usually favors the f4 lenses
4. Usability - indoor shooting argues for IS and f2.8, particularly on crop cameras where noise is an issue preventing ISO boosting

What everyone wants is a low-cost, light-weight lens which can capture any image at the desired bokeh. Until someone comes up with a new idea for imaging, we are sometimes stuck with heaps of heavy, complicated, expensive glass to get the images we desire.

Where did you get that image quality favors the f4?
I have the 2.8 IS mark II and hear that it is better than the f4 IS. I had the 2.8 IS and the image quality of that lens was superb too? In fact I was reluctant to part with it to upgrade to the Mark II. Did you have any of these lenses to say this?

As far as weight goes, yes - the 2.8 lenses are really heavy. I think the f4 IS is sharp and has excellent image quality minus the bulk but minus the one stop advantage.
I guess compromises have to be made one way or the other.




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

3,081 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 F2.8 which verision?
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 dayuan99
865 guests, 315 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.