70-200 "IS I" or "IS II"?????

[jcskeeter]

I'm looking to purchase one of these but I can't seem to find a really legit reason why I would want to go for the "II" other than it's the newest one available. Can someone please point out the main difference? Maybe based on specs and personal experience? Thank You!

 

[Overread]

The MII has some benefits:

1) Improved optics - whilst the original was no slouch of a lens by any means there was room for improvement, esp at the 200mm end and when used wide open at f2.8. The MII makes these changes and the improvement is noticeable in shooting. Myself I've experienced this directly when moving from the MI to the MII - before I couldn't effectively use a 2*TC, it would work but quality was only so so - with the MII the 2*TC gives you an effective 140-400mm that is pretty much on par with the 100-400mm L

2) Improved IS - the original was generation 2, whilst the MII has a generation 4 (I think) IS system. In practical terms this means you gain around 4 stops worth of shutter speed with the IS. The engine is also much quieter than before

3) Improved magnification ratio - best seen with teleconverters and/or extension tubes; but the new lens makes a decent close up option

4) Slightly lighter - mostly minor here, but it is a tiny bit lighter.


In general either one is a professional top grade choice, the MII is just better. It's really a case of deciding for yourself on if you want to jump right for the best there is or if the older one is enough for your needs. The second hand price of the old one has remained high, showing that whilst people are upgrading there is still a demand for the quality of the old. Heck myself I only upgraded because of the afore mentioned desire for pushing the lens twice its native focal length - had I been only using it in the 70-200mm range chances are I would not have upgraded.

 

[Big Mike]

Just for the sake of clarity, its the "70-200mm F2.8 L IS" (version I)....or the "70-200mm F2.8 L IS II" (version II).

And yes, there are legitimate reasons why someone would want the newer version. There are probably a few threads about this, from earlier this year (try a search). From what I remember, the most important improvement is the new lens's ability to resolve detail. In other words, it's possible of sharper images and this is especially important with today's high megapixel sensors.

 

[jcskeeter]

Thanks Overread! Just what I was looking for. Sometimes these companies push newer greater products but they don't always put the details right in front of your face (at least not on the Canon product page?). Plus it doesn't account for personal experience either. I'm in the process of selling a Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II. (Switching over to Canon.) Either I try to get top dollar for it or cut the price. That's my reason for the question. Thanks for the help.

Overread kinda covered it I think but if anyone has anything else to add I would appreciate it.