Thanks to that other thread in here about B&H selling the 70-200 II at a discounted price, I grabbed one and wow am I impressed. I had about 4 copies of the old version before I found one that was pretty sharp, I was happy with it, but this one blows it out of the water.
Went to a Buffalo Sabres game last night and ended up with seats WAAAAAAAAY up high, literally 5 rows from the top, I was shooting with my 50D, and here's an example of what I was getting.
Just to add, this is a huge crop from the original, and look at the detail and sharpness!
kewlcanon wrote:
Exceptional lens the best 70-200mm lens out there
I'm not sure about best, but it is excellent for a zoom. The 70-200/2.8 VR II is really nice on the D7000, but I don't have a high-res FX body to stress it with. The 70-200/2.8 IS II is really nice on the 1Ds III and I think it will handle 32+ MP well too.
I have 70-200 VR II on D700, IMHO the 70-200 IS II has the edge. Not to mention shorter MFD. I'm just hoping the new 24-70L will be as good as the 70-200 IS II .
EB-1 wrote:
I'm not sure about best, but it is excellent for a zoom. The 70-200/2.8 VR II is really nice on the D7000, but I don't have a high-res FX body to stress it with. The 70-200/2.8 IS II is really nice on the 1Ds III and I think it will handle 32+ MP well too.
mco_970 wrote:
So is the new 135L getting any love, or is the 70-200 hogging the attention?
Well i really wanted to hang onto the 135L but i just could not justify it, so ended up returning it to B&H. While the 70-200 isnt really a direct replacement, it does 135mm good enough for my uses.
I received my replacement 70-200 IS 2.8 yesterday and it seems to check out fine. I haven't had time to compare it to the 135L but then the lenses serve different needs. The zoom can't do F2.0 and the 135 can't zoom. lol The 135L is my go to indoor sports (gymnastics/basketball) lens for low light venues. The slower zoom just isn't fast enough.
Will Patterson wrote:
Imagine those pictures with some blur added.
Congratulate with a new fantastic lens.
But to be honest, in my opinion, your statement is not true! Great picture with a superb lens - but stop saying that a picture like this looks different and with blur on a good mkI if not 100% cropped and unsharpened. I own a MK1 that produce sharp pictures @ 2.8. If you do not pixel peep and crop 100%, you will not see the difference.
I do not say that the MKII not is sharper than MKI - it is at most focal lengths @2.8 - but it is possible to produce such pictures with the MKI without visible blur.
Fjellfalck wrote:
Congratulate with a new fantastic lens.
But to be honest, in my opinion, your statement is not true! Great picture with a superb lens - but stop saying that a picture like this looks different and with blur on a good mkI if not 100% cropped and unsharpened. I own a MK1 that produce sharp pictures @ 2.8. If you do not pixel peep and crop 100%, you will not see the difference.
I do not say that the MKII not is sharper than MKI - it is at most focal lengths @2.8 - but it is possible to produce such pictures with the MKI without visible blur.
I'm sorry, but it does. I really wish I had my old one so I could show you side by side comparo's. I had Mk 1's for about 7 years, only the last one made me happy but I knew it had its limitations as far as being sharp wide open. The Mk2 is just a great deal better in not only sharpness, but the AF speed seems to be about double, and the IS is a big leap forward.
