Reading mode: Light Dark

70-200 IS II on the way, sold IS I

Go to last post
C

cabasner

Well-known member
Messages
153
Reaction score
1
Location
Las Vegas, NV, US
Hi all,

Nothing really significant to say here other than I sold my IS I version today, and ordered the IS II. Being primarily a portrait photographer, and shooting mostly with a 5D Mark II, I'm hoping to see something fabulous from the new lens. Not that I had any issues with the old one, but even the tiniest bit of improvement is welcome. Looking for that razor sharpness. I know that for portraits, many say that it's overkill to use a lens that sharp. I say, you can never be sharp enough, and I can (and do) knock back the detail in post when appropriate. In any event, we'll see what happens when the new one arrives on Friday. It's been awhile since I've had a new lens show up on my doorstep!
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
 
Coincidentally I also ordered the 70-200 is II today and expect delivery on friday. I haven't sold my IS I version yet but I am now going to have to sell it to fund part of the version II. I am looking forward to the new lense.
 
Could you tell me how old was your v1?
was it made before 2006 or after?

Thanks,
Harry
 
I thought v1 although good was not as sharp as my 70-200 F4 (non IS), but heard so many good things about V1 so I bought it. It is fairly good at 2.8 and 3.2 and am generally happy with it, but found it was never quite as sharp at F4, 5.6 as the 70-200 F4L. Would like to know what you think of the new V2. It means a bit of extra cash and trouble selling V1 and the question is although very subjective, is it worth it. I have read all the glowing reports of V2 but always you like to hear more.
 
Not being a kill joy here but please read these posts...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=36157015
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=36371068
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=35528589

I bought a MK II and there was a grinding noise, no other IS lens i own which includes the 70-200 2.8 IS MK I made that noise too.

I sent it back and just bought myself another one, the lens is fantastic, its sharp, colours are amazing and not soft at 2.8. I shot with this lens yesterday and no noise coming from the IS at all.

Please beware and test the lens as much as you can.

Its an amazing piece of glass, my 135L won't be used unless its for portraits only now.
 
Harry,

Regarding my version 1, I'm pretty sure my old lens was from prior to 2006, but can't say for sure. It was one of the first lenses I bought when I did the swap to Canon, so, now that I think on it, it had to be pre-2006.
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
 
I'm tempted to update too. What is a MK I worth these days (assuming good condition, with tripod mount and case)? Where did you sell yours?
--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 
As far as version 1 value, I saw prices as high as $1,420 on E Bay. I put mine up on the local Craigslist, and was asking $1,500. I got an offer of $1,300, and thought I'd take it. Mine was in absolutely perfect condition, like brand new, literally. I had the box, all the paperwork. I was only missing the case, which got misplaced, but I offered to get the buyer a case from B&H for $20.00, to seal the deal.
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
 
Thanks. So, I could probably make about a $300 profit - and then throw all that into a MK II. But I wouldnt sell my MK I until I had the new lens in my hands - I wouldn't want to be without my favorite lens.
--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 
Thanks Curt,

I just asked cause there is a rumor that during 2006 a silent upgrade was made.

Mine is a Feb2008 model, and I find it fairly sharp.

Don't know think I'll ever upgrade... it's too expensive...the only real improvement is the AF speed if you use new bodies like 7d or 1DIV... IMO

best wishes,
Harry
cabasner said:
Harry,

Regarding my version 1, I'm pretty sure my old lens was from prior to 2006, but can't say for sure. It was one of the first lenses I bought when I did the swap to Canon, so, now that I think on it, it had to be pre-2006.
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
Click to expand...
 
Most welcome, Harry.

I will be shooting a bunch of high school kids this weekend for their Homecoming dance. I should have the lens in hand by then, a perfect opportunity to check it out (after verifying the autofocus and other details first, of course!) Will be fun to have the new beast on the end of the 5D Mark II, and given my knowledge of the old lens, I'll get to see how much (if any) better the II lens is.
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
 
My 70-200 F2.8 IS USM was made in Dec, 08. I have always found mine to be pretty darn sharp and am hesitant to part with it to replace it with the newer version, to say nothing of the additional cost. What is the source and content of the "rumor" you have heard about there being some kind of upgrade during 2006?
--
Abovethecrowds
 
Just done the same altho I now have to sell the I version on Fleabay, I was never happy with my I version at f/2.8 at it was a little soft.

Oddly enoughh the box for the new version is miles bigger that the old one.

I took a test shot today, hand held wide open at 200mm and 1/15th sec and it was razor sharp, quite remarkable!
 
In your opinions from those that went from version 1 to 2, was it worth the price of the upgrade?

I'm still debating and I really don't have any real complaints about my current lens.

I did the micro adjust on the camera which made it tack sharp on my 5dMark II.

Can you all post some sample shot?
 
We're talking about a possible secret upgrade, thus, it's nothing official.

I've red about it on a dpreview forum thread.

The same might have happen on 100-400L, during 2006.

Also, if you see the link below, 2.8IS mk1 lens used to have MFD 1.3m, not 1.4m.

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_70_200mm_f_2_8l_is_usm#Specifications

This made me believe that a secret upgrade can be realistic.

wishes,
Harry
abovethecrowds said:
My 70-200 F2.8 IS USM was made in Dec, 08. I have always found mine to be pretty darn sharp and am hesitant to part with it to replace it with the newer version, to say nothing of the additional cost. What is the source and content of the "rumor" you have heard about there being some kind of upgrade during 2006?
--
Abovethecrowds
Click to expand...
 
How did you carry out your micro adjustment. I know how to make the adjustments, just wondering what method you used.
 
Hey all,

Got the new lens last night! I've been able to do no real testing yet, but I can say that it seems, just by looking through the lens, that the IS appears to work magnificently. You can see it working more obviously than the series 1, at least to my eye. I'll have some real attempts at image making later today, and give you some thoughts. It's truly solid, just like the old one.

Oh, and I got a Lowepro Stealth Reporter 650AW bag along with the lens, and it is way cool, too!
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
 
Some practice shots last night and today tell me that the IS II is a definite improvement. I shot a portrait at 0.4 seconds hand held at 150mm, and it's darn sharp, to the point of individual eyelashes visible, on an image where the head filled about 1/3 of the frame. Very impressive, at least for me...my ability to solidly hand hold a camera is not at all something to be proud of. So, from this aspect alone, I'm happy. Other images, not challenging the IS, are equally good. It's a keeper!
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
 
cabasner said:
Some practice shots last night and today tell me that the IS II is a definite improvement. I shot a portrait at 0.4 seconds hand held at 150mm, and it's darn sharp, to the point of individual eyelashes visible, on an image where the head filled about 1/3 of the frame. Very impressive, at least for me...my ability to solidly hand hold a camera is not at all something to be proud of. So, from this aspect alone, I'm happy. Other images, not challenging the IS, are equally good. It's a keeper!
--
Curt Basner
Las Vegas, NV
Click to expand...
Sounds good. A bit like the 28-300 IS, increadibly good at really long shutter times. How do you find the bokeh of the 70-200/2.8 IS II compared to I?

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top