Nice review. I am glad to see that the new lens is consistantly sharper. I struggled getting a sharp copy of the first version. I tried out 4 or 5 before I got one that I felt was sharp (as sharp as my drainpipe) at 2.8 and 200. I won't be changing, mainly because of the price and I don't feel mine has let me down in any way but it is good to see Canon making efforts to tighten things up.
"My main disappointment with the lens is that it looks so much like the previous version. The focusing grip is slightly different, and the lens is a touch longer by a few millimeters. They are quite hard to tell apart. The disappointment would come in that no one would really know you had just spent a small truck-load of money on a new lens."
i don't get that.. why should anyone know how much you spend on your gear.. ?
As I mentioned before, I had the f/2.8L IS version and was very happy with it. However, I preferred the f/4.0L IS for its lighter weight/more compact built and seemingly sharper images it creates. But now I got to a point that I would be willing to put up with the extra weight on the Mark II version of the faster lens for the edge in IQ. It is seriously the best of the bunch at this point. Canon is gearing up and is in the process of increasing the resolution of their lenses in anticipation of introducing the 1Ds Mark IV, an uber-pixel camera (> 34MP) in the not too distant future.
There is enough difference between the Mark I and Mark II at a glance and that's in the lenshood but again, you have to know what to look for . The lenshood of the Mark II has a rougher texture and it has a latch that you have to push in order to twist/remove the lenshood. Not that it matters anyway... .
Thanks for posting the review Tom. It pretty much agrees with my experience since getting a Mark II about a month ago. It's much better than the f/2.8L IS Mk I and even slightly better than the f/4L IS, especially as you get away from the centre of the image.
I like the new hood latch - it'll save me lots of money on gaffer's tape.
Orestis.Ch wrote:
"My main disappointment with the lens is that it looks so much like the previous version. The focusing grip is slightly different, and the lens is a touch longer by a few millimeters. They are quite hard to tell apart. The disappointment would come in that no one would really know you had just spent a small truck-load of money on a new lens."
i don't get that.. why should anyone know how much you spend on your gear.. ?
I laughed when I read that--What a silly comment. If the lens functions well as is, who the hell cares if it doesn't look much different from the MKI? Can anyone honestly be disappointed because they look similar? Its a lens for god sake, not a fashion statement or status symbol.
M Vers wrote:
I laughed when I read that--What a silly comment. If the lens functions well as is, who the hell cares if it doesn't look much different from the MKI? Can anyone honestly be disappointed because they look similar? Its a lens for god sake, not a fashion statement or status symbol.
no kidding,, my 1DMKIV looks like a 1DMKIII the horror
as for the lens... really considering a jump to MkII.. but feel my mkI is pretty sharp wide open @200mm.....better then most sample pics I see anyways.
spdntrxi wrote:
as for the lens... really considering a jump to MkII.. but feel my mkI is pretty sharp wide open @200mm.....better then most sample pics I see anyways.
Agreed. While the MKII is becoming ever more tempting (the price, however, is not), my MKI performs very well at 200/2.8.
Orestis.Ch wrote:
"My main disappointment with the lens is that it looks so much like the previous version. The focusing grip is slightly different, and the lens is a touch longer by a few millimeters. They are quite hard to tell apart. The disappointment would come in that no one would really know you had just spent a small truck-load of money on a new lens."
i don't get that.. why should anyone know how much you spend on your gear.. ?
anyway.. nice review apart from that
He was making a joke. You have to know this guy....he's got a dry sense of humor.
At the end of the part you quoted above you left out this part, " At least Nikon had the courtesy to make their new lens look substantially different. Easier to swagger with the new gear. " Notice the wink at the end? It's humor folks. Don't sweat it.
I think the comments about the look were tongue-in-cheek.
Eric
M Vers wrote:
I laughed when I read that--What a silly comment. If the lens functions well as is, who the hell cares if it doesn't look much different from the MKI? Can anyone honestly be disappointed because they look similar? Its a lens for god sake, not a fashion statement or status symbol.
spdntrxi wrote:
as for the lens... really considering a jump to MkII.. but feel my mkI is pretty sharp wide open @200mm.....better then most sample pics I see anyways.
Same here. I rented one for a weekend and while the results with brick walls etc are obviously better, with what I shoot (weddings) I'm not really sure that the differences are that noticeable.
I think the improved edge and corner performance will be most useful for landscapes and other shots where you want good IQ all across. For portraits and many general purpose images, it won't be a big advantage over the Mk I.
M Vers wrote:
I laughed when I read that--What a silly comment. If the lens functions well as is, who the hell cares if it doesn't look much different from the MKI? Can anyone honestly be disappointed because they look similar? Its a lens for god sake, not a fashion statement or status symbol.
I laughed when I read that too - but you have to know Neil's got a sense of humor. It was a joke, folks...
M Vers wrote:
Agreed. While the MKII is becoming ever more tempting (the price, however, is not), my MKI performs very well at 200/2.8.
Crazy how different things are for different folks. My 70-200........ @ 200 2.8 is the reason I may spend $1200 or so to upgrade it. It is WAY over priced, but since its selling, I guess they should have priced it at $3000 or so.
. The lenshood of the Mark II has a rougher texture and it has a latch that you have to push in order to twist/remove the lenshood. Not that it matters anyway... 