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

GTSR · December 2013

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.

mississippi mac · December 2013

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

WaterEngineer · December 2013

I knew Tim would swing by with a thought. His opinion was the same as mine about the two versions of the Nikon lens.

itsonlygas · January 2014

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

Onewolf · January 2014

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.

bmarkey · January 2014

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.

GTSR · January 2014

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 mac · January 2014

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...

WaterEngineer · January 2014

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

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

Replies