Would the 70-200 2.8 II beat this?

inferior is a pretty harsh word, you must have got a poor copy of the 2.8 lens. Very happy with my version

sparqk wrote in post #17840455
inferior is a pretty harsh word, you must have got a poor copy of the 2.8 lens. Very happy with my version

Well inferior simply means "not as good", which it isn't.

If we're talking degrees of inferiority then it's possible my copy wasn't the best but all I know is I wanted my f/4 back almost immediately. There are probably better copies of the f/2.8 Mk1 out there but, IMHO, none of them would stand up to the f/4L IS in image quality - it's an amazing lens. Of course if you need the extra stop then it's totally useless

my bad. I thought you were talking about the 70-200 ll 2.8 as being inferior. I'll read a little more carefully next time.
I got the 2.8 ll for shooting in the woods and in hoping the larger aperture increases auto-focus accuracy over the 70-300 l (which is no slouch)

sparqk wrote in post #17840484
my bad. I thought you were talking about the 70-200 ll 2.8 as being inferior. I'll read a little more carefully next time.
I got the 2.8 ll for shooting in the woods and in hoping the larger aperture increases auto-focus accuracy over the 70-300 l (which is no slouch)

Ah I see - no worries

I love my 70-200 II to death, my favourite lens by far.

I rented the F4 IS and the 70-200 F2.8 IS II to compare side by side against my 135L for a shoot.

Sharpness wise, they were all pretty much the same. Sure, if you want to convince yourself that viewing 100% you can tell the differences, be my guest. You will have greater variances from the DOF and failing to nail focus 100% perfectly using the 135L and the IS II wide open than to be able to tell them apart.

The IS version I sucks. The copy I had left a bad taste in my mouth. My F4 non IS was much better, so I would only consider the F4 IS or the IS II. And the only reason I personally would consider the IS II over the F4 is for shallow DOF needs (or if you shoot in low light).

To answer the OP, you will not notice any differences in your images, and most importantly, any non-photographer would have absolutely no chance of ever telling the difference.

You have to remember most cameras and lenses get most normal shots. It is the ones that start to stray out of the norm. That is where the better lenses show their stuff. A pin hole in a Quaker oats box can get you sharp pictures under the right conditions. Your iPhone 6s can too. But let things get somewhat tough and the good lenses come through.