Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS MK1 Vs f/4 IS

[Antiquote]

Originally Posted by gryphonslair99

If you have not had the lenses calibrated at the factory then the mentioned results are tentative at best. I was having the same kind of thoughts about my 24-70 until I sent it back to Canon and had it re-calibrated.

is this not the same as the micro adjustments you can do on most new cameras? Of course this only works for your current body, so I guess the difference is it would work on any camera if completed by Canon.

[poloman]

The 2.8. The 7D has microadjustment. I find that fairly frequently I am faced with a low light situation. I've had good fortune with the sharpness of the lens.

[golfer]

I use the 2.8 with my 5d and the results have been tack sharp for me. This lense has been a wrork horse for me along with my 24x70 and 100x400. They have all been good performers with the 1x400 probably loosing a little against the others. Would love a 500 f4 but the money jusst isn' there.
I love the 2.8 when indoors which allows me to shot w/o flash mosst of the time.
If I could afford it, I would even consider both, but if I could have only 1, I would get the most veresatile which IMO is the 2.8. The weight is a factor and you will feel it if you use the camera all day long. I probably have felt it most at air shows and such where I am lifting the camera aver my head on most shots.
Good liuck and best wishes.

[gryphonslair99]

Originally Posted by Antiquote

is this not the same as the micro adjustments you can do on most new cameras? Of course this only works for your current body, so I guess the difference is it would work on any camera if completed by Canon.

It generally can be if the body has the capabilities but not always. A friend had to send in his 70-200 to Nikon for what he thought was a calibration issue. While the lens did need or at least got re-calibrated, it also had an element that had slightly slipped. Once that element had been returned to the proper position and the lens re-calibrated it was a whole new and wonderful beast.

[stef@apl]

I have some free clean & adjust coupons from canon, guess it's time to use them.

[gryphonslair99]

That's why they gave them to you. Might as well put them to good use if you can afford to be with out a particular lens for a few days.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by stef@apl

That's pretty damn sharp, at least from the reduced version. Apparently my copy is more "normal", and softer at 200mm.

A 70-200F2.8 L IS Mk I ('classic' ) should be as sharp as demo-ed by Swampler. Your copy isn't normal, but soft

Have you tried focus adjust @200mm w/it ?

...€0.02

Kindest regards,

Max@Home

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by stef@apl

I have some free clean & adjust coupons from canon, guess it's time to use them.

Max@Home

[stef@apl]

Originally Posted by Max@Home

A 70-200F2.8 L IS Mk I ('classic' ) should be as sharp as demo-ed by Swampler. Your copy isn't normal, but soft

Have you tried focus adjust @200mm w/it ?

the-digital-picture's copy was about as soft as mine.

I will test out focus adjust @200 to see if I can correct the softness. I mean, it's not horribly soft, but soft enough that I'd far prefer extra noise on a sharper image.

[richardpcrowe]

Occasionally, I carry my 300mm f/4L IS on my 7D for some specific walkaround shooting and it is just to darn heavy to be comfortable for 8-10 hours of walk around shooting.
I mention that because the 300L is approximately the same weight as the 70-200mm f/2.8L (series) lenses.

I opted for a 70-200mm f/4L IS for my walk around shooting. I carry the 70-200mm f/4L IS paired with a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens on a pair of 1.6x cameras. I can carry the f/4L IS lens AND the second 1.6x camera at approximately the same weight as the f/2.8L (series) lens alone.

I carry the two lenses everywhere and I have shot hand held in many different venues. I have never left the f/4L IS lens at home because it is too heavy but, I have read many posts in which the poster states that the f/2.8L lens is "too heavy" with which to travel...