Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · 70-200 II
  
 
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · 70-200 II


I have read so much about how good the 24-70 II is compared to version I, but am not seeing much regarding the 70-200 II vs; the version I.
Is there as good an improvement with the new 70-200?



Mar 14, 2013 at 08:19 PM
msalvetti
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · 70-200 II


That flurry of "OMG" posts occurred over a year ago.

I went from an older non-IS to the new 70-200II. On my 7D, I found the MkII focused more reliably. If I were to compare the sharpest photos from my non-IS at f/2.8 to the sharpest from the MkII, they would be very close. But I feel I get a lot more great shots out of the MkII than I did from the non-IS.

I'm happy I upgraded. Not happy that before I could sell the non-IS, the focus failed. Now it's just a brick in a bag that I haven't gotten around to getting fixed.

Mark



Mar 14, 2013 at 08:26 PM
AGeoJO
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · 70-200 II


Oh, yes! The improvement is at least the same if not more compared to that of the 24-70 Mark II over its predecessor. This lens has been around longer and the raves about the improvement have subsided .


Mar 14, 2013 at 08:30 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · 70-200 II


3iron wrote:
I have read so much about how good the 24-70 II is compared to version I, but am not seeing much regarding the 70-200 II vs; the version I.
Is there as good an improvement with the new 70-200?


The 70-200/2.8L IS II sets the standard for an excellent 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. The 24-70/2.8L II lives up to that standard.

I got my 70-200/2.8L IS II in April 2010. Were you sleeping that year ? .



Mar 14, 2013 at 08:35 PM
Stoffer
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · 70-200 II


105 reviews giving a average rating of 9.9. One would think that it is decent.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=386&sort=7&cat=27&page=2



Mar 14, 2013 at 08:39 PM
kezeka
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · 70-200 II


It is a lens that produces great images compared to the 'good' images that I got from my 70-200 non-is. I just upgraded this year and am still on the fence as to whether or not it was worth the additional cost to get it over the IS mk I for my usage cases.

Let there be no doubt, it the best 70-200 made today. Whether "the best" is worth it over "good" is up to you.



Mar 14, 2013 at 09:03 PM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · 70-200 II


Thank you folks for updating me. I didn't realize it had been out that long. Looks like I must put it on my gotta have list.
Best wishes to you.



Mar 15, 2013 at 01:29 AM
artyphoto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · 70-200 II


I had a mk I (is) and the mk II is superior, giving me an option rather than using my 400 2.8 mk I in some cases.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:16 AM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · 70-200 II


I had a an excellent 70-200 f/2.8 mk I IS and the mk II is better again. It's basically as good as primes and good enough I may even sell my beloved 135L, although it hurts just to say it out loud.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:16 AM
Invertalon
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · 70-200 II


The 70-200 II is one incredible zoom lens. It really is prime-like throughout the entire range. Beautiful lens.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:27 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Peter Figen
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · 70-200 II


The place where you really see the difference is where so many people use the lens - wide open at 200mm. The version 1 was actually pretty soft wide open at that focal length, while the new one is tack sharp and more importantly, contrasty, wide open. No veil. Crisp. This lens is actually sharper wide open than the 200 1.8. When they're both at 2.8, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference - at least in the middle of the frame.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:41 AM
kevindar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · 70-200 II


I think the original 70-200 2.8 IS was in much less of a need of upgrade than the 24-70 2.8. so the 24-70 II is a more significant upgrade.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:43 AM
Stoffer
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · 70-200 II


Pixel Perfect wrote:
I had a an excellent 70-200 f/2.8 mk I IS and the mk II is better again. It's basically as good as primes and good enough I may even sell my beloved 135L, although it hurts just to say it out loud.


This. I'm considering selling my 135L also. I have been testing them side by side @ 135 mm and f/2.8 and I can hardly tell them apart. 135 mm @ f/2.0 is obviously different, but the 70-200mm f/2.8 II I IS is one fine lens.



Mar 15, 2013 at 01:13 PM
AGeoJO
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · 70-200 II


I sold my 135mm shortly after I got my 70-200mm Mark II but I ended up buying another copy. Yes, the difference in sharpness is not noticeable, if any but there is a slight difference in the bokeh rendition at f/2.0.


Mar 15, 2013 at 01:26 PM
Stoffer
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · 70-200 II


If I keep the 135mm f/2L, it will primarily be because of the lower weight.


Mar 15, 2013 at 01:32 PM
ggreene
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · 70-200 II


AGeoJO wrote:
I sold my 135mm shortly after I got my 70-200mm Mark II but I ended up buying another copy. Yes, the difference in sharpness is not noticeable, if any but there is a slight difference in the bokeh rendition at f/2.0.


I'm in a very similar position. Sold the 135 after getting the 70-200 II but now am thinking of getting another copy. Not for bokeh but for that extra stop. Sometimes you just need it no matter how good the 1DX's high ISO is.



Mar 15, 2013 at 01:53 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · 70-200 II


The main reason that I decided to keep my 135/2L is that it's the only medium telephoto with high enough IQ to be a suitable backup for the 70-200/2.8L IS II. When I do events, I mostly use my f/2.8 zooms, but I sometimes also bring a case with my Canon fast primes. The 35/1.4L, and especially 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L II, provide shallow DOF photos that you just can't get at f/2.8. The 135L is what I'd use if my 70-200/2.8L IS II stopped working.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:02 PM
AGeoJO
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · 70-200 II


One good thing about the 135mm f/2.0..... I have not encountered any sub-par copy and I am on my third now .


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:07 PM
John Caldwell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · 70-200 II


Version II has pretty much eliminated our use of the 135/2; and cuts very heavily into use of the 200/2.


Mar 15, 2013 at 02:17 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · 70-200 II


John Caldwell wrote:
Version II has pretty much eliminated our use of the 135/2; and cuts very heavily into use of the 200/2.


Not the 200/1.8L.



Mar 15, 2013 at 02:31 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password