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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II
  
 
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


ggreene wrote:
Hmmmm, I shot sports with a non IS version for many years and I would not say the AF of the IS II is blindingly fast in comparison to it. A little better at best. I don't even notice that much difference between the two with a 1.4x on and I've got the latest version.

Was the IS v1 that bad?


No, it was fine. The Mk II is a bit better in every performance category. The biggest differences being IQ at the edges and corners, but that sometimes doesn't matter, at all.



Mar 03, 2014 at 06:59 PM
mark fadely
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


.







Mar 03, 2014 at 10:18 PM
WebDog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


I had the v1 got the v2 and to me the v2 was giving better wide open sharpness and more contrast. I never felt the v1 was poor, it was my most used lens but the v2 is (to me) clearly better. Does it show on print, maybe not... But my v1 was sold within days after getting my v2. I simply like the IQ from my v2 That's whats count in my book


Mar 03, 2014 at 10:22 PM
tuantran
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


Why do people here assume that by shooting at f2.8, center sharpness is all that really matters? A lot of my photos, the subject is away from center. Maybe it's just me? This is especially true when I'm shooting sports where the subject is 2/3 either left or right of the photo.


Mar 03, 2014 at 10:30 PM
Psychic1
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


I purchased three Gen 1 lenses and sold them all abd then purchased an excellent copy from a member of FM, but it was too late, my love of the 70-200L IS was over and I sold it to a member of FM.

Every Gen II I have seen has been exceptional and if I needed a new 70-200L IS I would purchase the Gen II.




Mar 04, 2014 at 12:00 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


tuantran wrote:
Why do people here assume that by shooting at f2.8, center sharpness is all that really matters? A lot of my photos, the subject is away from center. Maybe it's just me? This is especially true when I'm shooting sports where the subject is 2/3 either left or right of the photo.


But can you truly say your images, even if not in dead center, were not sharp with the V1 lens? It's the deep corners where things are different and usually those deep corners only really matter if the lens is stopped down and the image has a foreground, mid ground and background subject. Sports photos typically have an isolated subject...and when shot at 2.8, the intent is to not have the corners sharp at all as the focus is really about the isolated subject, not what is in the corners. The same goes with portraits or wedding shots...basically anything shot wide open.



Mar 04, 2014 at 02:47 AM
tuantran
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


chez wrote:
But can you truly say your images, even if not in dead center, were not sharp with the V1 lens? It's the deep corners where things are different and usually those deep corners only really matter if the lens is stopped down and the image has a foreground, mid ground and background subject. Sports photos typically have an isolated subject...and when shot at 2.8, the intent is to not have the corners sharp at all as the focus is really about the isolated subject, not what is in the corners. The same goes with portraits or wedding shots...basically anything shot
...Show more

Yes, V1 is sharp, but I can definitely see that V2 was sharper. Maybe it's my justification for the $1000 difference but other people comment the sharpness of it and they didn't even know the cost or cost difference.



Mar 04, 2014 at 05:51 AM
ggreene
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


Heavy cropping is where I notice the difference between my non IS and the IS II for center/mid frame sharpness. It's not huge but it is there. If you shoot FL limited it's nice to have that extra sharpness. As Chez said the corners don't mean a lot to me as I rarely put my subjects towards the edges of the frame and since most of the time I'm shooting wide open the corners are off the plane focus anyways.


Mar 04, 2014 at 07:22 AM
kevindar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


owned both and roger is right on. May be I had a very good copy of version 1. yes, I could see a difference at 200mm 2.8, in both contrast and sharpness at 100%, however, I would say for portraits at least, the difference is very very small. the version II at 200 2.8 takes the 2x extender better, if that matters to you.
I sold my version 1 for 1510, and version II cost me only 1840 after rebates. to me, 330 to upgrade to a brand new lens, with better stablizer, and slightly better 200mm performance was worth it. I would say, the difference to me is worth up to 500 bucks, not more.



Mar 04, 2014 at 10:29 PM
kzoockof
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


ggreene wrote:
Hmmmm, I shot sports with a non IS version for many years and I would not say the AF of the IS II is blindingly fast in comparison to it. A little better at best. I don't even notice that much difference between the two with a 1.4x on and I've got the latest version.

Was the IS v1 that bad?


I didn't say blindingly fast in comparison. I simply said blindingly fast, which I think the 70-200 v2 is. I also stated that the v1 is and has always been regarded as an excellent lens by professionals (which in my understanding is accurate).

I will leave it to the OP to develop his own impression on my comments, which indicated that what is best for him is dependent on him, his needs, shooting and budget.

Most people would love to own and be thrilled to have the 70-200 2.8 (with or without IS) V1 in their bags. They are great lenses. Most dslr people (perhaps not reflected in these forums) can not justify the cost of a $1,500 or $2,000 lens that weighs a few pounds from both a financial perspective and personal level of expertise perspective.

If my initial post seemed that I was minimizing the qualify, performance and capabilities of the 70-200 2.8 V1, that was not at all my intention, nor is it my feelings.



Mar 06, 2014 at 10:23 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Gunzorro
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


I had the first version and didn't like it. Not the weight, the sharpness, color, IS or focus speed. It sat in my safe, only used a couple of times. Tried it for head shots for my actress daughter and didn't like the portrait results any better than the 70-300 IS (the 70-200 IS was is the better lens, but not for that scenario). After a few years I sold it, and not being impressed enough with the focal range, haven't felt inclined toward the new v. II., although I've seen how much better it is.

Ironically, later I bought both the 28-300L IS and 100-400L IS with both eyes open and find them much better suited to my needs.



Mar 06, 2014 at 10:48 PM
Joe Garner
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


AnthonyRay wrote:
They are 2 very different lenses. I actually got the Sigma 70-200 OS, which is far better than the first generation Canon (its target when developed) and stands up to the II in places, but just places.


I've always thought that the consensus was that the Sigma is every bit as good as mkI but could not be compared to mkII, particularly when IQ at 2.8 and speed/reliability of AF are concerned.



Mar 06, 2014 at 10:51 PM
Joe Garner
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


tuantran wrote:
Why do people here assume that by shooting at f2.8, center sharpness is all that really matters? A lot of my photos, the subject is away from center. Maybe it's just me? This is especially true when I'm shooting sports where the subject is 2/3 either left or right of the photo.


Because center is where the most sensitive AF points are, and most of the time it is much easier to crop than to move AF point around



Mar 06, 2014 at 10:54 PM
elluDe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II



Ver 2 is sharper and more contrasty - but, for portraits, especially those shot wide open at f2.8, I'd much prefer the background blur from the Ver 1 lens.

While its difficult to describe the difference, I find the Ver 1 lens backgrounds are softer with the colours blending together in a nicer way. Maybe more like you'd expect from a prime lens.



Mar 09, 2014 at 01:28 AM
JayCeePhotog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


Just caught up with this thread! Sorry that I haven't read it all, but I am highly considering the V2 in my next purchase, but as always, reluctant to spend money a college budget.

I am still holding the IS I and the Sigma OS version in high regards, but the weather sealing is selling me more for the IS I because sports games can get a little messy at times.

As always, thanks for everyone's input. I appreciate it all very much, and it has helped me in deliberating a few things.



Mar 09, 2014 at 10:46 PM
caspase8
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


Go for Ver II


May 16, 2014 at 10:33 PM
pipspeak
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=103&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0


May 17, 2014 at 12:07 AM
EvilZardoz
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


Having used the first and second gen of these lenses, I can definitely say that the II is worth it for me. I usually shoot at 2.8 on the 5D III. Softer images, more CA on the mark 1.

Sometimes you can get a great deal on the mark 1 IS lens. This lens isn't a bad lens, it's still a brilliant chunk of glass and will make images you will love for many years to come - but for me, the II was well worth the extra coin over the 1.



May 17, 2014 at 04:33 PM
hongvu122
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


I brought both with me on a recent trip to Africa and ran a bit of a test. I mounted each one to a Canon 7d (I had two of those bodies at the time) and proceeded with the trip, grabbing whichever body was close to me at the time when I was looking for that focal range. When I went home, I could not tell which pictures were taken with one lens vs. the other. When you use resources like The-Digital-Picture, it is easier to distinguish, but in real practice, many external factors will probably play a larger role in picture quality than having a mkI or mkII. Going from an f4 to f2.8 yielded a much more noticeable result for me. Ultimately, I kept the mkII because knowing that it does produce a slightly sharper image on tests plays a factor for me. However, I would not hesitate to purchase the mkI and direct the funds saved towards other things such as tripods, heads, and various accessories that may ultimately help the mk1 obtain its peak performance.


May 18, 2014 at 04:48 AM
dphereyes
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS I vs IS II


II is the best I have ever used.


May 18, 2014 at 03:11 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