MSC wrote:
stan...what is the white stuff on the first pic? Water?
Yes, water. Full frame picture posted on the on the 3rd page of the thread. The crops are cut-outs from the pictures posted, as they were requested earlier.
. I think you did just fine with the OOF camel, as anyone can tell that it's a camel. The 1st image has amazing corner-to-corner sharpness. Looks like it was shot with a Zeiss lens.
mohamed alfari wrote:
I think its a must lens to have, similar to others it replaced 135L 70-200f4is and almost 85f1.2ll but glad i didnt.
bobbytan wrote:
The 1st image has amazing corner-to-corner sharpness. Looks like it was shot with a Zeiss lens.
But look at the colors! There is almost no color separation at all. It can't be Zeiss
On a more serious note, this freaking zoom freaking spanks the Canon 100 L IS macro resolution figures (photozone) center and corner, and gives the Zeiss 100 MP serious contest.
I wish I hadn't started looking at this thread. I keep coming back and keep wishing I hadn't. I mean the images are great, but, well you know what I mean. :^)
After some recent, mediocre attempts to capture indoor cricket matches I finally bought this lens. However, given the cost and weight, the f/4 version is a very nice, cheap alternative if you have the extra light. Bearing in mind that a cricket wicket is considerably further away from the spectators than home base on a baseball field, the following shot was made with the f/4:
How does the bokeh at 135mm @ F2.8 compare to the 135mm @ F2? Just curious as I did try the lens out briefly and it is vastly improved over the Mark I.
khphotography wrote:
How does the bokeh at 135mm @ F2.8 compare to the 135mm @ F2? Just curious as I did try the lens out briefly and it is vastly improved over the Mark I.
To be completely honest. I prefer the 135L. Much smoother, and a tiny bit sharper... but still. Not that much different. But we are comparing a 2.8 zoom with an f/2 prime...still keeping that in mind. the 70-200 is still amazing.
The 70-200 2.8IS II will more than likely be my next lens purchase. I've heard that with a 1.4 it's pretty close to the 300 f/4. Considering I'll need a 300 f/4 before long...it's a no brainer.
Though my 70-200 2.8IS is a very sharp lens, I know that it's a jaded lens, and has been improved upon. Doesn't make my images "worse", and the lens is still great with some of my most sold photos to its credit, but I know that the newer one will treat my heart well.
I am almost certain I will be buying this lens in a few weeks, however I would love some input with my current inventory and in particular to the current camera I have.
I wanted to ask anyone that might help me decide on a purchase of a new lens. With my current camera (XSI) is it worth purchasing 70-200 2.8 IS MKII? Will I be able to utilize the lens with the current camera I have to its full potential? I will be shooting sports and wedding events this year for friends and family and am also in the process of creating a portfolio for myself. I will later on upgrade the camera to most likely IDS MKII or maybe 7D. Would love your thoughts on this please and Thank you.
. I think you did just fine with the OOF camel, as anyone can tell that it's a camel. The 1st image has amazing corner-to-corner sharpness. Looks like it was shot with a Zeiss lens. 
