Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 20, 2012, 11:49 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 629
Default Canon 70-200mm IS 2.8 vs Canon 70-200mm IS 2.8 II

I already own the Canon 70-200mm 2.8F IS lens.

I've read the reviews of the updated version of this lens (Canon 70-200 2.8 IS USM II) and I don't understand the language of cameras well enough to fully grasp what is being written.

The cost for me to trade up (if I sell my current lens) is about $400.

I'd be using this on a Canon 5D Mark iii body.

Is the difference in the two lenses worth the $400?

I've got two trips planned for two places I'll probably never see again, and I plan on taking two lenses. My 70-200 going on both trips. So I'd like to get this one right.

Thanks for all your help!

Faithfully yours,
FP
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 20, 2012, 12:28 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

While the "II" doesn't necessarily mean that the optical design has changed, in this case, it seems that it does.

But from SLRGear's test results, I'd say that there's not enough difference to warrant switching:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM (Tested)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (Tested)
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 1:30 PM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Big differences I would think (especially at the peripheral) for $400 on a full-frame

Old:

New:
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 1:36 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL View Post
Big differences I would think (especially at the peripheral) for $400 on a full-frame
That would seem to jive with comments I've seen around from people upgrading. Incredibly sharp lens by all accounts from hands-on users. It's also important to note there are differences with the focus implementation. There were threads out there discussing this - but Canon changed not only their in-body focus system but also implementation in the lens. Do some searches on other forums - the new combinations really work together.

Another reason why you just don't blindly search lens review sites for answers. Sometimes the answers are more complicated than what you see on a given review.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 1:42 PM   #5
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Don't have time to do more digging, but here's 1 (of 3) articles written by lensrental discussing this aspect of the new lenses and work with 5dIII:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012...-canon-cameras
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 3:09 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

SLRGear tested the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM almost 3 years ago, so this isn't something that just popped up.

If you want to nitpick the test results, the older version has less vignetting, and while the newer one is sharper at 70/2.8 (as per the included charts), wide open at other focal lengths they're about equal, and stopped down, the older one is sharper.

The LensRentals article didn't have anything significant to offer. LensRentals sells off lenses that are older than two years, and since the "II" has been around for at least 3 years, they don't have a "I" to compare it to.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 3:24 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The LensRentals article didn't have anything significant to offer. .
Really? The OP owns the 5dIII. The article discusses how the new lenses have improved focus performance when paired with the 5diii that they don't see when the new lenses are paired with older bodies or the 5diii is paired with older lenses. Why do you think improved focus performance isn't relative to the OP?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 4:36 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Really? The OP owns the 5dIII. The article discusses how the new lenses have improved focus performance when paired with the 5diii that they don't see when the new lenses are paired with older bodies or the 5diii is paired with older lenses. Why do you think improved focus performance isn't relative to the OP?
  1. The article didn't say anything about improved AF performance of the "II" over the "I".
  2. The article specifically mentioned that, unlike some other lenses, the "II" WAS NOT better on the 5DIII than on 5DII.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 10:12 PM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Not a direct comparison, but the original non-IS 70-200 f/2.8L (full-frame), which is sharper than the 'old' IS version, is clearly exceeded by the 'new' II:
Old: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff...0f28ff?start=1
New: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff..._2is28?start=1

You can verify this on the APS-C (which still carries) both IS and non-IS version to compare:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos

So in term of 'IQ' this is how I would rank them:
70-200 f/2.8L IS < 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS < 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
__________________
photos (ϕοτοσ), light
graphos (γραϕος), painting

Last edited by NHL; Nov 20, 2012 at 10:30 PM.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2012, 3:59 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
wave01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,749
Default

hi have you tried either of these lenses out on your camera. if not i would go and try them. i went through this earlier this year could not afford the canon but looked at the sigma. when i went to try it i was stunned by how heavy it was. i then tried the canon 70-200L IS f4 much lighter. i tried both out and then went and had a coffee and reviewed the results my choice was the canon much lighter to carry and the results were stunning.

its always in my bag and goes every where with me.
wave01 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:49 PM.