70-200 f2.8 IS vs 70-200 f4 non - IS inferior IQ ?

I just recieved my new 70-200 f2.8 IS. I was excited to kick the tires. First thing I done was an evaluation against my trusty f4 L model, which I always considered to be a spot on lens. I was dissapointed that in a shoot out on my 30D the f2.8 was not as sharp or contrasty as my f4, still very good, but visibly not a match. The f2.8 was not only softer at f2.8 (as one may expect) but at all f stops up to f16. I compared the lenses at at 70, 135, and 200 focal lengths. Both mounted on a tripod with the f2.8 IS switched off. I have heard of rare instaces of the f2.8 being soft out of box. I was wondering if any other members have experienced similar results and have either returned the lens hoping for a better copy or sent it to Canon for a calibration check? Maybe I have an ultra good copy with my f4 lens. Comments appreciated.

Sorry to hear that you aren't satisfied with your lens. I'm saving up for a couple of L series lenses at the moment and I'm absolutely dreading it because from reading this lens forum for the last few weeks I'm fully expecting to get something sub-standard, unless I get lucky.

Mike

My 70-200 f4 L kicks the crap out of pretty much every other lens I have ever used.

period

Mike,
It's not that I'm unsatisfied with lens, it may well be a good lens. I'm just surprised that the IQ is not on the same level or better than the f4 under my bright daylight test. Of course it could be argued that in low light combined with IS the f2.8 would out perform the non IS f4 handily.

Both the f/4 models are rumored to have superior quality to the 2.8 in terms of sharpness. I don't own either but I have read this numerous times.

The rating order of the 70-200s I have seen is the following.

1. f/4 IS
2. f/4
3. f/2.8
4. f/2.8 IS

Always interesting how the IS models bookmark the lineup. If you search around POTN I'm sure you'll find some threads referencing this.

Okay, I see. I've got the 70-200mm non-IS f/4 L on my wish list, so it's always interesting to read about the different 70-200mm lenses.

Mike

I have both the 70-200 F/4 Non IS and the F/2.8 IS, F/4 and below they look pretty much equally sharp to me (and my F/4 is deadly sharp), perhaps the contrast/saturation is ever so slightly less on the 2.8 IS, but this is mad pixel peeking. In the end I'm very pleased with the IQ of both.

If you cannot get fabulous photos from any one of the Canon 70-200 lenses, don't look at the lens, look at the person in the mirror. Stop pixel peeping as start taking photos.

I don't think sharpness should be a criteria at all when looking at the 70-200 lenses. They are all sharp. The 70-200 f4 IS seems to be the sharpest, but the margin is probably very small.