70-200 f/2.8 IS II vs. Non-IS Pic Comparison

I had a chance to compare these 2 lenses and I was surprised that under these conditions, there was very little difference in the sharpness between the 2. Both shot at 200mm, f2.8, 1/400 and ISO 1250. These are straight out of the camera, no adjustments besides resizing. There is some difference in the colors, but that could easily be corrected post. Anyway, for those comparing the 2 like I was, if you don't need the added features of the IS II, you can safe yourself $1,000+ by picking up the non-IS.

Anyway, can you tell which one is the IS-II?

I would buy the sigma 70-200 2.8 OS over this lens, indeed I did so.

Good comparison. Im debating this very moment between the f/4 IS, 2.8 and 2.8 IS. Weight is not an issue, but IQ is. Any have a handheld comparison between the f/4 IS and 2.8 non IS?

Very interesting. But why make us guess? Some heavier crops would be nice too.

Well I may be surprised once I learn the results, but the top copy is noticeably sharper than the bottom copy.

Top looks better. Your not taking focus speed in to account either.

The top is sharper.

Top is definatley shaprer but your s;litting hairs

The top is the IS II, bottom Non-IS. Here are the 100% crops in the same order as well.

It looks like the contrast that is making it sharper.

What camera? I get sharper photos from my 70-200 is mk ii.

Robertk2012 wrote in post #14720571
What camera? I get sharper photos from my 70-200 is mk ii.

I also got sharper shots from the MK II copy I used before. I'd even say that my $475 sigma 70-200 f/2.8 wide open at 200mm probably has better sharpness than the posted pics . But when I shoot the sigma and the MK II in the same event, the results are just not in the same league, not even close.

Can you do a test under better lighting, ISO no more than 400 ideally? Woud love to see it.

Here is my sigma 70-200 f/2.8, the first generation released over 10 years ago, at 200mm, f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/250 sec. The lighting is probably worse than the OP's test shot environment.

is this a 7d body with aggressive jpeg NR?

Both images looks soft.

Drop your ISO to where you are at least two stops below the 1/focal length rule and get back to us...

The top one seems a bit more poppy, but eh. All the Canon 70-200's are really very good. Sigma 70-200 OS is really really good, too. So many good choices.