is MK11 70-200mm f2.8 is L lens really sharper tha MK1 ?

[shooter22]

Thinking of trading my f4 lens in for f2.8 70-200mm anyone had the chance to compare MK1 and Mk11

[DrJon]

Re: is MK11 70-200mm f2.8 is L lens really sharper tha MK1 ?

The mk II is quite a bit sharper wide-open, less so stopped down. It's not light though at 1.49Kg (I know that by heart now) so think carefully.

I spent most of today at the Marylebone Summer Fayre (which was great) and left the 5DmkII at home, too much weight for a fun non-photographic event. The pic shows my GH3's size (which is about the same as a 450D) vs. a 1D with a 70-200 f2.8 - BTW the lens on the GH3 is also a 70-200 (equiv) f2.8.

[briansquibb]

Re: is MK11 70-200mm f2.8 is L lens really sharper tha MK1 ?

Size is the main issue here. Both lens are very good - The 2.8 is a lot heavier and longer. If size and weight (and money) are not an issue then the it is a good move.

[Hereford_EOS]

Re: is MK11 70-200mm f2.8 is L lens really sharper tha MK1 ?

I have owned both the mark one and mark two versions of the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lenses.
On the 7D camera I actually preferred the mark one.
Technically the mark two is sharper at the long end (200mm) but I had a very good mark one and did not notice the difference.
Saying that; the 7D makes use of the centre sweet spot, I think the difference would be noticed more on a full-frame camera such as the 5D3 or 1D-X .

[colin C]

Re: is MK11 70-200mm f2.8 is L lens really sharper tha MK1 ?

I have tried both on a full frame and you will be pushed to tell the difference in normal use, which is why I haven't traded my MKI for a MKII. With the right subject, if you pixel peep to extreme you will notice some difference wide open at f2.8, but that is mostly at the edges.