Comments on: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II Hands-On

By: Anatoly Manzhola

Anatoly Manzhola — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:06:38 +0000

I just bought absolutely miraculous brand new Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS II USM. I have purchased 2 lenses to choose the best one. I am very critical about my equipment. I have the version 1 of this lens. I made several comparison shots with my new lenses against my old version #1. At 200 mm the new lenses were in a totally Different League. The difference to that degree was unexpected. My Canon 70-200 2.8 IS looks now as a piece of junk.
The new lenses are extremely sharp even wide open. The contrast and colours are way better as well.
I am very excited about the results. The new 70-200 F2.8 IS II is as sharp at 135 mm as a Canon 135 mm lens which tells you a lot. Time to retire all my primes.
Take a look at this link:
https://rcpt.yousendit.com/837565498/76df60827e7f49394e3620d717bc7b2e

By: Wade

Wade — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:26:40 +0000

Tob: Right-click the red link below the picture and download the whole image. It looks a lot sharper when not zoomed in so far. Also, yes, it is a little soft, but I would assume this is due to camera shake. Remember, he is hand-holding a 200mm lens in artificial light! What’s important is it’s a lot sharper than the old one. However, I will reserve my judgement until after I see Bryan Carnathan’s review here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Wade

By: Tob

Tob — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:41:35 +0000

Is it just me, or is the second picture soft as well? Is it the IS that fails to deliver a sharp picture, or is the lens that soft at the long end wide open?

By: Wade

Wade — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 13:17:50 +0000

TheJBJ: I re-read the description of Canon’s “Hybrid IS” system. It appears you are correct, in that it is targeted at shorter focal lengths and of particular use in macro work. Although interestingly, most of the review copy I’ve read about the new 100mm macro seems to suggest that the IS system doesn’t seem to do much.

Wade

By: TheJBJ

TheJBJ — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:33:41 +0000

Wade: I think the Hybrid IS was primarily for the Macro Lenses. Since the minimum focus of this lens is not close to Macro, I’m not sure that Hybrid IS would make any impact. I could be wrong though, I haven’t used the Hybrid IS yet.
I do agree, that there isn’t that much on paper that makes this lens seem to be worth a higher price. I’m sure it will go up about 20-30% though, since that’s the trend Canon is going with. I don’t currently have an issue with the IS in my current 70-200 2.8L IS, so I’d love to see how they made it better. Most of all, it was due for an update just because of what Nikon is doing. Better glass and better coatings (that just keep up with the times) is not worth an extra $500 of my money at the end of the day. I would love to see them make the lens a little bit sharper and keep the price where it is.

By: Wade

Wade — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:48:48 +0000

Everyone seems pretty happy that this lens was updated since it is so popular and versatile. However, I’ve not seen a single photography expert ask the one most important question. Where the hell is hybrid IS? If that system is to be taken seriously, THIS was the lens to put it in, not a 100mm macro. This lens is handheld by professional photographers everywhere all the time. In my opinion, this should be Canon’s IS flagship. The way I see this is that Canon has found a way to raise the price of a lens that is a perenial best-seller. I could be wrong, we’ll see when the price is announced.

Wade

By: MikeD

MikeD — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:41:17 +0000

I’m curious if the IS still vibrates and makes noise? Maybe hard to hear at CES but you might feel it.