70-200 2.8L non-IS

Started May 27, 2012 | Discussions thread
mmullen Veteran Member • Posts: 4,285
Re: A slight optical difference

graphikal wrote:

xxxpongxxx wrote:

re image quality, how much better is the 2.8 IS v2 compared to this one?

Slightly. Optics are not a reason to upgrade from the f/2.8L non-IS, as verified by the-digital-picture.com . Color and contrast are fine on both (as a matter of fact I'm unaware of any L lens where these are poor). I can't vouch for AF differences, however.

No one said the color and contrast were poor, just that their is a considerable difference between the two (especially when shooting into the light).

The test charts at the-digital-picture.com are not backlit but the differences show up there as considerable:


But photos taken under laboratory conditions do not show the very significant differences in the real world (www.the-digital-picture.com images are taken using very precise manual focusing). One of the biggest differences between the two lenses is focus precision (the newer lenses have more AF positions than older lenses to accomodate sensors with higher pixel density) and that has a much greater effect on the resulting images than lab photos will show.

Of course if all your photos are taken with manual focus that won't matter.

-- hide signature --

Mike Mullen

 mmullen's gear list:mmullen's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EOS 7D Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +6 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow