Comments on: Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II Preorder at Adorama

By: Moonshadow

Moonshadow — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:49:06 +0000

Buy the old model before they stop selling it or the price goes up any further.

By: Hydroponic Closet

Hydroponic Closet — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:52:56 +0000

Not long ago I started a blog, and the information you provide on this site has helped me tremendously. Thank you for all of your time & work. cheers!

By: Jimchimer

Jimchimer — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 12:21:34 +0000

The MK 1 version is a bargain now if the new
price on the MK II holds. I read thetoolman’s review
and that’s pretty much all he said. Sounds like he’s
glad he bought the old model to me.

By: Samuel

Samuel — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 15:44:58 +0000

why did canon uk price the lens at GBP2799.00?..it is way overpriced

By: Foosball

Foosball — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:21:25 +0000

What’s with this pissing match? Canon just raised the price of admission with a huge price increase for the same thing with a little lipstick on it. Am I supposed to feel bad because I own the old lens?
What are you nuts?

By: Sibony

Sibony — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:23:13 +0000

I own the MK I too and I would never have bought it if
Canon had priced it at $2499.

By: thetoolman

thetoolman — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:12:23 +0000

No hard feelings, but you should learn how to read.

LOL

By: Reviewer

Reviewer — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 04:01:20 +0000

BTW, I have the mk I and wouldn’t writing the comparision review without actually trying mk II.

By: Reviewer

Reviewer — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 03:59:30 +0000

oops, thetoolman is upset that nobody is buying his justification for his lame purchase and taking things personal. IMHO, thetoolmen mentioned it as review of mk I and mk II and all I read in that review is buyer’s remorse.

By: thetoolman

thetoolman — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 06:25:48 +0000

You originally asked how I am qualified to comment on the new lens when I don’t own it. At least I actually own the old one unlike you. I don’t know what kind of photo work you do but if you ever want to take indoor shots without using flash I doubt you would be just as happy with the f4 version of this lens. There is a big difference between the light gathering ability of these lenses. Also, I was quoting the preoder price of the new lens at Adorama and not Amazon. It’s certainty possible that the price might come down some once the lens is in full mass production, but I doubt it will ever sell for much less than the Nikon version. If you really read my review you would have known that I basically felt the old lens was so good that I doubt anyone would even notice the improvements in the Mark II. I also said that no one should assume anything about the new lens until it is tested and reviewed. You might want to wait for those reviews before you buy it. On the other had you could save yourself a bundle right now and buy the old version before it is gone forever. Buy, hey, everyone has has got to do whatever is right for them like you said.

By: Stoneking

Stoneking — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 04:44:43 +0000

you should have saved your money and bought the f4 version. i dont have either(im waiting for the 2.8 mark II), but looking a the MTF charts it seems as if the f4 may be just as good as the 2.8 at all apertures except 2.8 of course. Ive heard complaints about the sharpness of the Mark I @ 2.8. i borrowed a friends Mark I for a vacation in Hawaii and was very pleased with the results. lets face it, 1649 is expensive and so is 2499. there is no right or wrong decision. you paid more money to get the 2.8 over the 4 and were paying more money for the same reason to get the mark II. I also wouldnt benchmark too many prices from amazon. they were selling the 70-200 Mark II right after it was released for something like $5000 for all of the suckers in the world.

By: EF mount

EF mount — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 22:36:58 +0000

Heh, I just found out, that Nikkor 70-200VR II is for 65,999CZK in CR, so that means 200$ more than Canon. Over 3300$ for Nikkor and over 3100$ for Canon, which is funny, since Nikkor is 200$ below Canon in USA…

By: thetoolman

thetoolman — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:21:17 +0000

It looks like you only read the part of the review you wanted to read.
I clearly said that the old lens has a terrific reputation for taking spectacular photos and that the new lens will cost at least $600 more. As you can see it can now be preordered for mere $2499 now on Adorama. Since I wrote the review the old lens went up $100 on Amazon and the new lens is being priced two hundred dollars higher than I predicted. That’s a total of an $800 difference. If you feel that this new lens is worth $800 more than the old one then go ahead and buy it and make my day LOL. For your information, I purchased my lens for $1649 with free shipping. I am actually thrilled that this ridiculous price increase will do nothing more than make my lens much more valuable and I am still getting amazing photos.

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 09:41:37 +0000

So what you are saying is that you have not tried the new lens but feel that you are still qualified to say that it won’t be any better than the old one? Yeah, really valuable review there.

It sounds to me that you don’t like the fact that you invested in a lens six months before a new model was released. Sour grapes and all that..