« on: December 02, 2011, 11:26:07 AM »
The 70-200 is sharp and very nice overall, still... both copies not as sharp as my 70-300L.
Your experience differs from some of the reviews. Are you basing the comparison on images where you used autofocus, and have you done an AF microadjustment for your lenses?
Not getting into a debate with you Neuro... but to answer your question: Used AF but No micro adjustment since my 5Dc does not support it. The refurbed one has some back focus issues on AF, at a distance of about 20ft from the subject, it will focus 6-7 inches deeper than the spot AF I choose. This is consistent (f2.8 ). When it does focus 6-7 inches back, the results are sharp. I posted a 100mm test in another thread, the newer one has less of this back focus bias, but when they do focus, the sharpness of both copies is similar. I posted a couple of quick shots here comparing the two 70-200's I have: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2262.15.html towards the bottom of the page.
With my 70-300L, It is easier to make out the weave of the fabric of the subject clearer at similar distances compared to the 70-200f2.8. Assuming both shot at 200mm. Granted I have not done set up formal tests for this scenario (200mm) , just going of experience...
I will set up more elaborate tests if you care to purchase the 70-300L, otherwise personally I am convinced my the 70-300L copy is sharper than both 70-200f2.8's which are pretty sharp on their own.