EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

[Keith B]

Wonder if I'm still gonna like film as much after I go FF digital.[img]/emoticons/emotion-1.gif[/img]

No.





Unless you you are talking medium or large format.

[musickna]

Interesting. Nice incremental changes, but nothing significant enough to make me want to give up my existing 70-200mm f/2.8 IS. I'll be following the reviews when it hits the streets though. So many lenses, so little time & cash.

[Colin]

I'm not really excited about spending another grand to get a marginal improvement. I'd rather have another lens, or a portion of a new body.

[Alan]

I'm not really excited about spending another grand to get a marginal improvement. I'd rather have another lens, or a portion of a new body.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Agreed.


For someone who doesn't already own a version 1, it might be time to get version 2. But, everyone knows that version 1 is an outstanding lens, and the marginal improvement at such a significant increase in cost? Not for me. Like you, I'd be considering another piece of glass or an additional camera body.


Edit: I should have also said this: it's going to be more than a grand for the new one, since we won't get the full price for selling the old one.

[peety3]

I'm not really excited about spending another grand to get a marginal improvement. I'd rather have another lens, or a portion of a new body.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

For someone who doesn't already own a version 1, it might be time to get version 2. But, everyone knows that version 1 is an outstanding lens, and the marginal improvement at such a significant increase in cost?

Outstanding, yes. Without room for improvement, wrong. If you ever try the 200/2, you will understand how much better life can get. I have a 'favorite shot' of the Seattle Space Needle, taken from perhaps 1.25 miles away, handheld at night, ISO 1600; it's so incredibly crisp and detailed that you can tell which TVs are on, and where people are standing. The 70-200/2.8IS can definitely be improved a lot.

[elmo_2006]

@Peety3...


LOL...but now you are comparing a fixed focal lens to a zoom lens which is a no-no!


I do agree that any lens can be approved upon, but for current owners of the Mark I, upgrading to the Mark II may not be necessary as the MTF charts show. An actual review of the Mark II should put everyones questions andconcerns hopefullyto rest.

[Alan]

I'm not really excited about spending another grand to get a marginal improvement. I'd rather have another lens, or a portion of a new body.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

For someone who doesn't already own a version 1, it might be time to get version 2. But, everyone knows that version 1 is an outstanding lens, and the marginal improvement at such a significant increase in cost?

Outstanding, yes. Without room for improvement, wrong. If you ever try the 200/2, you will understand how much better life can get. I have a 'favorite shot' of the Seattle Space Needle, taken from perhaps 1.25 miles away, handheld at night, ISO 1600; it's so incredibly crisp and detailed that you can tell which TVs are on, and where people are standing. The 70-200/2.8IS can definitely be improved a lot.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

I never said "without room for improvement." I said marginal improvement with a significant increase in cost. There's always room for improvement, but at what cost?