EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS versus EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II

Jul 20, 2010
159
0
6,026
I have a EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS I bought used to use for sports, but I found that the AF never really kept up, so I haven't used it much. Do I have a bad copy, or is this fairly normal for this lens. (This is all with a 7D)

Is it worth selling it and getting the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II ? I have heard the image quality of the mark II is much better. Is this lens any good for sports, or should I go with a prime instead?

Thanks!
 
I've had both and would probably still be using the 70-200 f/2.8 IS-Series-I if I hadn't dropped it. It was repaired but never quite the same. Comparing my two copies I'd have to say there is very little in it. I suspect my Series-I was a seriously good copy before the drop. The Series II is fantastic too, sharp at f/2.8 right through to about f/11.

Shooting action using AI-Servo, neither lens performed like my 300 f/2.8is, but that's to be expected. OOF tracking shots can be attributed to user error in most cases. Provided you've got a good body behind the lens there should be good results using correct technique. Your 7D should be fine. You'll always get better AI Servo performance from a 1-Series body with it's higher capacity battery driving the AF just that little bit faster.

-pw
 
Upvote 0
The mkII is slightly better in ever respect. It's sharper at 200mm f2.8 than the mkI, it's AF is quicker, it's IS unit is better and quieter, it's more robust. The list goes on.....it's better with teleconverters.

I was never that impressed with the results from the mkI wide open at 200mm. but a great lens all the same.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks Everyone.
I think I'm going to sell my EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS and my 7D and get a 7DmII when it comes out. (if it isn't too crazy expensive)

I have a EF 70-300L and it seems to do the trick, at least for good light. I will have football from now until end of November, and most of the games are daylight games. (the little guys 11 years old)

Thanks again.
 
Upvote 0