Help! 70-200 Canon MkI or MkII?

Help! 70-200 Canon MkI or MkII?

Author
Discussion

pernod

Original Poster:

433 posts

189 months

Friday 31st December 2010
quotequote all
Hi guys,

I'm going stir crazy on a lens decision... any advice appreciated!

I'm looking at the MkI or the MkII 70-200 2.8 IS Canon lenses.

I've been looking for a while, and have just been offered a mint 2nd hand 70-200 2.8 IS MkI for £750. Thats under 1/2 the price of the new MkII!

So here's my dilemma:
  • The MkII has significant improved image quality, especially (apparently) on high density pixel's like the 7D I use.
  • However, the price difference is huge!
I'm leaning towards the MkI as I generally prefer to use wider lengths (10-50mm) so this lens isn't likely to become my standard. It's also far to heavy for my liking for daily use; so, the price difference doesn't seem justifiable. I do however expect the lens to be used mostly wide open at 2.8 which is where th MkI is noticeably softer than the MkII.

So, before I jump in... does anyone have any advise?
  • Have you used the original 70-200 on a 'high density' cropped sensor (50D/7D etc)? How did you find it? Is it 'sharp enough'?
  • Anyone actually used the new one? Is it as sharp as they say... specifically is it noticeable in real world shooting?
I know it's a difficult question of price vs quality which is a very individual thing I know, but I suppose the question I'm really asking is: what would you go for?

Crafty_

13,297 posts

201 months

Friday 31st December 2010
quotequote all
Buy the Mk1, if you don't get on with it I reckon you could move it on for a profit pretty easily.

Rofly Lollers

759 posts

196 months

Friday 31st December 2010
quotequote all
I have both and usually use them on a 50D. The mk II is better wide open, whether it is worth double the price of a used mk I is another matter.
I bought the mk II thinking I would sell the year-old mk I for around 1k, so the trade-up would only cost £500.
At £750 for a mk I, I'd go for that instead.

Edit: Also note the mk II works better with extenders. I haven't tried the 2X on the mk II yet, but on the mk I it was only useful at f/9 because of CA at other apertures.
The 1.4X works well with both.


Edited by Rofly Lollers on Friday 31st December 13:43

pernod

Original Poster:

433 posts

189 months

Friday 31st December 2010
quotequote all
Great perspective thanks guys!

I hadn't actually thought about it like that before, but you're both right, I'm not exactly stuck with my decision for life so that makes it an easier call :-)