misternikko wrote:
why does everyone think that?? lol it cracks me up because no one here likes that show at all...its so not miami, at least the miami ive know for the 14 years ive been here.
is jersey shore really like jersey shore lol?
Having been to miami, I know this. It just makes me think of it.
Jersey shore is more like a bunch of rejects from ny that want to make Italians look bad.
misternikko wrote:
i would feel really guilty buying the original 70-200 knowing someone could show up next to me with the exact same skill set and the mk2 version and potentially blow me out of the water because I skimped on my tool and didnt buy the updated version. I know this kinda makes no sense being that I bought the 5Dc over the 5D2 but I actually read that a lot of people preferred the original version so I rationalized with that. I havent read anyone saying they kept the original 70-200
Trust me... Although the new 70-200 mk2 version is better than the original it certainly won't "blow you out of the water". As for sharpness I have owned both the original IS version and the non-IS version and I can say from experience that the non-IS version is sharper and is very close to the sharpness of the new IS mk2. I still think you are putting too much emphasis on the IS part of the equation.
Your assumption on the 100 F2 is correct. It does have some purple fringing wide open but not quite as much as the 85 1.8s that I have used.
mspringfield wrote:
Trust me... Although the new 70-200 mk2 version is better than the original it certainly won't "blow you out of the water". As for sharpness I have owned both the original IS version and the non-IS version and I can say from experience that the non-IS version is sharper and is very close to the sharpness of the new IS mk2. I still think you are putting too much emphasis on the IS part of the equation.
Your assumption on the 100 F2 is correct. It does have some purple fringing wide open but not quite as much as the 85 1.8s that I have used. ...Show more →
The 70-200/2.8 IS is the sharpest non super-tele prime Canon makes. It's sharper than the 100 macro, and certainly much better than either of the previous 70-200s.
Sp12 wrote:
The 70-200/2.8 IS is the sharpest non super-tele prime Canon makes. It's sharper than the 100 macro, and certainly much better than either of the previous 70-200s.
Did you mean to state 70-200IS II? Because the IS V1 is at the bottom of the stack for sharpness behind the VII and non IS.
The one lens that has not been mentioned especially for portraiture is the 85mm f1.8 It is a great lens and has the perfect perspective for portraits of people. It is a light lens, pretty solid, sharp and is reasonable on the price.
Been mentioned a whole bunch actually a lot of people like it, I used to have it and the 100/2 was mentioned too. I don't really care for the fringing on the 85/1.8
artsupreme wrote:
Did you mean to state 70-200IS II? Because the IS V1 is at the bottom of the stack for sharpness behind the VII and non IS.
I agree. The original IS is the bottom of the 3 Canon 70-200 2.8's but you are talking about 3 very sharp lenses and it is still extremely sharp. To see the difference you really have to start pixel peeping especially after running them through post.
Sp12 wrote:
The 70-200/2.8 IS is the sharpest non super-tele prime Canon makes. It's sharper than the 100 macro, and certainly much better than either of the previous 70-200s.
Oh. I am not saying the new version 2 isn't the sharpest of the 3 but people are acting like the original is all of a sudden crap. I am pointing out that while it is not as sharp as the new one it is still a very good, very sharp lens.
artsupreme wrote:
Did you mean to state 70-200IS II? Because the IS V1 is at the bottom of the stack for sharpness behind the VII and non IS.
Clearly. Not only did I mention "either" of the previous 70-200 (implying the non IS, and the 1st gen IS), but the original IS was only moderately sharp (beaten handily by the Sigma 70-200 OS). I consider adding the II unnecessary at this point as the other Canon 70-200 2.8s are not worth talking about with the Sigma out.
a lot of people like it, I used to have it and the 100/2 was mentioned too. I don't really care for the fringing on the 85/1.8