70-200 2.8L non-IS

Started May 27, 2012 | Discussions thread
Per Inge Oestmoen Senior Member • Posts: 1,761
Re: 70-200 2.8L non-IS

mmullen wrote:

The difference is considerable, especially on a high pixel density APS-C, not as much on (for example) a 5D Mk I.

I have used both the EF 70-200 2.8, the EF 70-200 2.8 IS and the EF 70-200 2.8 IS II. And I have compared them all to each other.

I think you are talking about the difference between the newest IS II and the old IS version. There I saw a considerable difference - the first IS version was behind the non-IS version.

I have found that the EF 70-200 2.8 non-IS is considerably better and more contrasty than the EF 70-200 2.8 IS version I.

There is no pronounced difference between the EF 70-200 2.8 IS II and the EF 70-200 2.8 non-IS. It seems to me that the newest IS version is ever so slightly better than the 70-200 2.8 non-IS, but it is not large. The significant difference is between these two and the first version of EF 70-200 2.8 IS. That difference is the considerable one.

Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow