70-200 2.8 IS II is here

Man, that be cheap.

<<EYES FALL OUT>>

(I always have to go one better to out do The Hoff)

Sadly I'm too poor to pick up a 1-series, even for $1650 (for $1000 I would happily by the 1DIII and resell, though). Plus I think my money would be better invested in lenses rather than bodies right now, especially as none of my lenses would mount on the 1D.

The way I see it, by the time I get ready to upgrade to a 1D, the 1DV will be out, and I can pick up the mk IV for cheap(ish)!

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #9389976
Man! Your definition of "a little" is a bit weird dude.

Zooms have their place don't forget, I'm sure we'd all love a 1200mm too.

Not really, if the ALL NEW 70-200 F2.8 II is $2500 or whatever people are assuming you can get a super mint 300 F2.8 IS for $3400-$3600.. It all depends on what you shoot right? I love the 70-200 especially the F4 IS version I find it has better IQ than the F2.8 version . BUT neither have anything on a 300 f2.8 IS or a 200 F2 IS . just my opinion, ya the 70-200 is the work horse do it all lens im curious to read reviews on the "II" version with its updated optics and IS. Zooms def have there place but again if you can actually use a 300mm prime with whatever it is you do then its pretty hard to beat. I shot with 70-200 for about 8 years until I started using primes and the bokeh alone is worth the money to me.
Cant wait to read some opinions tho on the new 70-200 very cool canon finally updated it (not that it really needed it )

factoryphoto wrote in post #9396693
Not really, if the ALL NEW 70-200 F2.8 II is $2500 or whatever people are assuming you can get a super mint 300 F2.8 IS for $3400-$3600.. It all depends on what you shoot right? I love the 70-200 especially the F4 IS version I find it has better IQ than the F2.8 version . BUT neither have anything on a 300 f2.8 IS or a 200 F2 IS . just my opinion, ya the 70-200 is the work horse do it all lens im curious to read reviews on the "II" version with its updated optics and IS. Zooms def have there place but again if you can actually use a 300mm prime with whatever it is you do then its pretty hard to beat. I shot with 70-200 for about 8 years until I started using primes and the bokeh alone is worth the money to me.
Cant wait to read some opinions tho on the new 70-200 very cool canon finally updated it (not that it really needed it )

Mmm this is where I need to check your website...


Yep, I can see. For what you shoot (motocross) a 300 2.8 IS would be an excellent choice over the 70-200.

The IQ of the F/4 version is very similar at f/4 (the f/4 is slightly sharper). They f/2.8 is much better at 2.8 I know what you mean about it's quality though, super awesome!

Of COURSE a zoom won't be able to compete with a long Canon prime. The can't even compete with the cheap (by comparison) 100 2.8L IS, the 135L and the 200 2.8L. No offense to you of course as I see your point, but I don't really understand when people compare zooms to primes. Different things (of course zooms are getting better and better, but even a cheap prime can beat an expensive zoom).

Unless you go under 2.8 the bokeh won't be different... OF course focal length and sensor size make a difference, and your 200 f/2 has all those things.

I shoot events mainly and have been using a 16-35, 24-105, 100 or 200 prime combo. It's OK, but I really need a long zoom (flexibility is important as you can imagine).

So we agree. It depends what you shoot.

factoryphoto wrote in post #9396693
Not really

Yes really. In a thread about a 70-200 lens, suggesting a 300 is more than a little strange.

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #9396809
Unless you go under 2.8 the bokeh won't be different... OF course focal length and sensor size make a difference, and your 200 f/2 has all those things.

If I understand correctly, bokeh is the quality, not the quantity of blur. (I'm new to POTN but not as new to photography.)

So, bokeh can certainly be different even when you have the same focal length and aperture (where DOF, and thus the amount of blur, will be the same).

Just look at F2.8 on the 100 macro vs the 100L -- same DOF, different bokeh.
(Those several hundreds of $ buys more than just IS and weatherproofing -- it better, right?)

.

Collin85 wrote in post #9393159
I just found out I scored a few photog positions which are to start in just a few weeks - with the kind of shoots literally calling out for a 70-200. Dayum, things are looking more and more like me having to become an early-bird adopter of this new lens - whatever the premium Canon is gonna charge.

The Mk II won't be shipping in a few weeks?
(Unless your definition of "a few" >10?)

I am hearing April, but I guess it depends on where you are.

This is where rental comes in handy....


.

Could not see any samples in this thread (except from the samples direct from Canon)

I had the liberty to test a few shots with this lens earlier today (pre-production model)

Here is one of the shots

oddne wrote in post #9405332
Could not see any samples in this thread (except from the samples direct from Canon)

I had the liberty to test a few shots with this lens earlier today (pre-production model)

Here is one of the shots

Larger version at Flickr

Showing a shot taken at f/5 is just cruel and unusual punishment. We need wide open

TheHoff wrote in post #9394248
1D MK3 checked by Canon, $1650 -->

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/85612​9

<< MONOCLE POPS OFF! >>

the guy who sold his 1d3 is trying kill the next 1d3 seller or what ?

Tomminator855 wrote in post #9408735
the guy who sold his 1d3 is trying kill the next 1d3 seller or what ?

Not really, that MK-3 has seen some hard use it seems; a replaced mirror box?
A few scratches, 170K on the shutter, and a dip or two in the pond(kidding).

TaDa wrote in post #9406779
Showing a shot taken at f/5 is just cruel and unusual punishment. We need wide open

The only wide open I have was at 70mm, but here it goes. No post production at all, only export to jpg:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Can't really tell anything definitive on those pictures. It just looks like any other lens. We need some full crops in real tests like a football game or something at f2.8. We'll just have to wait.

I placed my order for my MK I on January 4th.

Do I get the bad-timing award?

Of course, I think that gives me until early February to send it back, if the MK II comes in affordable.

It's an old post but I had to respond:

grant247 wrote in post #9338756
Has anyone in the history of capitalism brought some improvement to market at a lower price.....I'm 61 and I can't think of an exception.

Computers sort of leap to mind. It's quite common to see products that offer more performance at a lower price.