Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Well, definitely not a very scientific test but did some sharpness test with my new 70-200mm f2.8L IS Mark II lens against my older non-IS version.

Note that the vignetting look is due to bad lighting. Mid-lens height is the same as that of the center target spot. All shots taken with my 5D MKII set to Manual mode @ ISO100. Camera was setup on a tripod with mirror lockup enabled and fired from a remote trigger allowing time for any possible vibrations to subside after the mirror locked up.

Shot in RAW and only the exposure level was adjusted due to the f2.8 being a little underexposed (too lazy to reshoot) before exporting to JPEG. No sharpness or other editing was done other than cropping.

Here are the samples.

This is the ISO 12233 Sharpness Test chart I was shooting. The red square indicates where the 100% samples are taken from.









For comparison, here are two shots from my 300mm f2.8 IS:

Did you see Lloyd Chambers' report on this lens?

http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/index.html

Don't know who he is, and for all I know, he could be another Ken Rockwell, so I won't comment further.

Yc

Impressive! Thanks Carlton. Now I gotta start saving

Yeah, I was following all the Lloyd threads on the other forums. I'll take a few more pics stopping it down to f8 and more and see if I can notice a diff.

So the moral of this story is: the more expensive the lens, the sharper it is.

Just did a quick test shooting the MKII at f2.8, f4.0, f8, f11, f16 (missed f5.6).



I can dump the full res version if anyone wants to pixel peep but I'm pretty confident with my copy.

Wow the mark II definetly looks impressive. Thanks for the tests Carlton!
If I end up buying this thing then I will hold you accountable

LOL, the proof is in the pudding and it's one yummy pudding.

Closest zoom to a prime as one can get I suppose.

Then again, the 70-200mm f/2.8 non IS is a 1993 design.
So the Mark II is a newer design and hence the better optics.

Good test!

Carlton, where'd you buy the mark II and for how much if you don't mind me asking?

What really stinks is, I need a new leather couch set... lol mark II... couch...

Great effort! Thanks for posting the test shots Carlton. I took mine out to Too Good Pond for a test drive... here is one :

Nice action shot. I knew form all the reviews that it was sharp before I got mine but I'm still impressed on how sharp it is. My older 70-200 non-IS has always been sharp but comparing them side by side, it's amazing how much sharper the new MKII is. I'd like to see the Mark I version on that chart test to compare.

Thanks for taking the time to compile this test Carlton. Your printer at work is muuuuch higher resolution than yours at home . A far more valuable test than the ad-hoc one we did a couple weeks ago. Good work!

I used the MkII this weekend to take some portraits. Just wow! I've never taken photos like this before! It unlocks potential you've never seen before.. for me anyway

Sometimes I wonder if we're so reliant on gear that we forget how to take photos without it.

For now I'd enjoy it. But I don't think the lens is making me a better photographer. Now I just shoot wide open continuously.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/riellanart/4492400308/" title="Intrepid Explorer by RielLanart, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/4492400308_a589f908d7_b.jpg" width="1024" height="1024" alt="Intrepid Explorer"></a>

can you get a hold of 70-200 f/2.8L IS mark I to do a comparison with mark II?

This model was on loan for tests at the recent winter olympics. The performance feedback from the pros was stellar.

Too bad I just don't see myself getting it this year.

LOL, no kidding. My cheap HP printer sucks.

Thanks for the review. I honestly enjoying hearing about other peoples experiences. I've often found it difficult to judge the expected quality of a lens. I do agree that there are many instances where not knowing how to use a piece of equipment may sour the results. But I'm sure we can all agree that quality isn't what it use to be.

After seeing the contrast on the Ef 70-200 IS f4 last year I really think the new fluorite elements make all the difference.

Personally I tend to shoot 1 stop down from wide open.

A drawback of overly using this lens is that one arm will be buff while the other one looks like an arm of a T-REX

It's too bad I don't own this piece of exercise equipment.