orangefirefish wrote:
+1
The Canon 70-200/2.8 IS absolutely puts the older Nikon version to shame, at least in the FF corners. There is no reason to update an already competent lens- especially since the new Nikon one is priced out of the price point that the 70-200 IS currently occupies.
I have to agree here as well, my 70-200 2.8 IS is excellent. If you're pixel peeping I wouldn't say it's as sharp as my 135L but, it's damn good and takes sharpening in post well. I'd say the new Nikon is probably just the equal or maybe just slightly better than the current Canon. However, since Canon is run by marketing people we'll probably see an update to the 70-200 to answer Nikon.
dancam wrote:
I have to agree here as well, my 70-200 2.8 IS is excellent. If you're pixel peeping I wouldn't say it's as sharp as my 135L but, it's damn good and takes sharpening in post well. I'd say the new Nikon is probably just the equal or maybe just slightly better than the current Canon. However, since Canon is run by marketing people we'll probably see an update to the 70-200 to answer Nikon.
Well, being an owner of both the 2.8 IS and the f/4 IS, there is definitely a difference between the two in favor of the f/4. Faster, more consistent AF (with 1D series cameras), somewhat sharper and better contrast, better backlight flare resistance, takes the 1.4x TC better... So there's definitely room for improvement in the 2.8 IS.
dancam wrote:
I have to agree here as well, my 70-200 2.8 IS is excellent. If you're pixel peeping I wouldn't say it's as sharp as my 135L but, it's damn good and takes sharpening in post well. I'd say the new Nikon is probably just the equal or maybe just slightly better than the current Canon. However, since Canon is run by marketing people we'll probably see an update to the 70-200 to answer Nikon.
Marketing or not, given that Canon is tight on cash like every other company at this time, they have much bigger fish to fry than to keep the 70-200 on par with Nikon. At this point it's not so much the lens selection that is getting Canon users to switch to Nikon (since Canon has the superior lens lineup)... it's the bodies. I highly, highly doubt the minute difference (if any) between the 70-200/2.8 IS and the new 70-200 VR II would make anyone switch from Canon to Nikon, or choose Nikon over Canon initially. In fact, the mere reality that it would cost a Nikon user a whopping $2400 to get performance on par with the much cheaper Canon version should be enough to keep most Canon users where they are- if not even current 70-200 VR owners.
orangefirefish wrote:
Marketing or not, given that Canon is tight on cash like every other company at this time, they have much bigger fish to fry than to keep the 70-200 on par with Nikon. At this point it's not so much the lens selection that is getting Canon users to switch to Nikon (since Canon has the superior lens lineup)... it's the bodies. I highly, highly doubt the minute difference (if any) between the 70-200/2.8 IS and the new 70-200 VR II would make anyone switch from Canon to Nikon, or choose Nikon over Canon initially. In fact, the mere reality that it would cost a Nikon user a whopping $2400 to get performance on par with the much cheaper Canon version should be enough to keep most Canon users where they are- if not even current 70-200 VR owners....Show more →
rscheffler wrote:
Well, being an owner of both the 2.8 IS and the f/4 IS, there is definitely a difference between the two in favor of the f/4. Faster, more consistent AF (with 1D series cameras), somewhat sharper and better contrast, better backlight flare resistance, takes the 1.4x TC better... So there's definitely room for improvement in the 2.8 IS.
Agreed, but for most purposes the present f/2.8L IS is more than good enough for commercial print, produces significantly smoother and softer background blur than the f/4L IS and has what I consider to be a nicer rendering for portrait purposes. For landscape and general use the f/4L IS is superb, but I don't feel that there's that much wrong with the f/2.8L IS for most commercial and pro shooting purposes.
On the other hand, Nikon had a significant problem with their prior f/2.8 VR being unacceptably soft in the corners on FF bodies, so had little choice but to fix the shortcomings of the previous lens.
orangefirefish wrote:
Marketing or not, given that Canon is tight on cash like every other company at this time, they have much bigger fish to fry than to keep the 70-200 on par with Nikon. At this point it's not so much the lens selection that is getting Canon users to switch to Nikon (since Canon has the superior lens lineup)... it's the bodies. I highly, highly doubt the minute difference (if any) between the 70-200/2.8 IS and the new 70-200 VR II would make anyone switch from Canon to Nikon, or choose Nikon over Canon initially. In fact, the mere reality that it would cost a Nikon user a whopping $2400 to get performance on par with the much cheaper Canon version should be enough to keep most Canon users where they are- if not even current 70-200 VR owners....Show more →
p.5 #11 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!
morpheus2891 wrote:
don't really care about new cams... im set with my 5D but as a guess I think the new IS tech is going to be seen in a 70-200/2.8 IS MKII... Nikon just put out an update to theirs, its a sports lens and it the weakest link in the 70-200mm line up that Canon's currently got. Just make sense to me. Other than that, I wish they would put out something like a 500/5.6 or 600/5.6 but Im pretty sure Im just waisting my breath.... seem like Canon is in a somewhat complacent rut... just hope they pull themselves out of it soon or Sony (and Zeiss AF glass) is going to start looking better and better...Show more →
p.5 #16 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!
Hot off the press:
" Canon Inc, compelled by weakening of US dollar, high costs of full frame CMOS sensor manufacturing, increased costs of air conditioning in our Canadian offices this summer as well as bonus payments to our 1DMkIII project team, will be raising prices on all of EOS cameras and EF lenses by up to 7% effective immediately."
