Canon 70-200 2.8 is the II worth the exta over the I?

GTSRGTSR Posts: 750 Officer
I have a Sigma 70-200 2.8 which I really like but the focus isn't great on a moving target. Having some Christmas cash, I was thinking of buying the Canon(used from KEH). Should I save up/ spend the extra and get the version II?


Thanks.

Replies

  • mississippi macmississippi mac Posts: 4,222 Captain
    the canon 70-200mm f2.8 is usm is a fine oiece of glass.
    the II version just has the better IS system that was designed for the efl 70-200 f-4 is usm.
    you might get an exta stop out of it due to the new IS system...
    i have the f-4 variente but have shot a lot with the older f2.8 varient...
    i don't think the efl 70-200 f-2.8 IS USM II is worth the money...

    but thats my opinion....

    tim
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The Real White Dog

    if you can't catch a fish...catch a buzz....
    #12976, joined 8-17-2002
  • WaterEngineerWaterEngineer Posts: 24,415 AG
    I knew Tim would swing by with a thought. His opinion was the same as mine about the two versions of the Nikon lens.
  • itsonlygasitsonlygas Posts: 2 Greenhorn
    GTSR- I have both but sold my 2.8isL after I bought the II. I looked long and hard about do it on paper didn't make sense to. So I brought in a memo card to a shop and hooked up both lens to a 5dii and took some shots then took my card home. Try thought before was how can it be this much shaper. When I hooked them to my computer the II lens made the I look slightly blurry. So I purchased it and sold the I to a buddy. In my unprofessional but super passionate opinion. If u can swing it and u like tack sharp pics. Get her.

    -cheers
  • OnewolfOnewolf Posts: 657 Officer
    Sweet little baby jeesus! The II costs $2500? I thought it was bad ten years ago when I paid $1600 for my 70-200 f2.8L IS.
    *** Tidewater 2100 Yamaha F150 ***
    *** Native Watercraft Magic 14.5 ***
    *** www.onewolf.org ***
  • bmarkeybmarkey Posts: 319 Deckhand
    I have the old version (can be bought for $900 to $1,200 used) and love it. I did read that the new version is sharper.

    Bob Markey
    United Realty Group
    www.WellingtonHomes.com
    Sport, Event & Real Estate Photography
    Palms West Photo
    www.MarkeySportsPhoto.com
  • GTSRGTSR Posts: 750 Officer
    I am only thinking of used... I use it outside, in the woods alot so new isnt best for me. The swing between a I and II on KEH is $600 or $700
  • mississippi macmississippi mac Posts: 4,222 Captain
    i did some of my testing with my 40d set on a tripod...
    i couldn't see $1000 worth of difference, or maybe my 40D couldn't resolve any differences...
    however a 40D is pretty tack sharp camera, even by todays standards....
    it may not have the dynamic range of the 7D or a 5d, but sharp is still sharp...
    i went for the efl 70-200 f4 is usm...
    but as mentioned earlier, i find myself still using my ef 70-300 is usm more often...
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The Real White Dog

    if you can't catch a fish...catch a buzz....
    #12976, joined 8-17-2002
  • WaterEngineerWaterEngineer Posts: 24,415 AG
    I am no Canon shooter but I have used this lens, albeit on a D1x and it is superb >>>> efl 70-200 f4 is usm...

    The new Nikkor 70-200mm f/4 is also superb. I would own one if I did not already have a 70-200 f/2.8
Sign In or Register to comment.