Lensrentals.com continues to release new MTF charts for various prime and zoom lenses. This time, they test 70-200mm f/4 lenses from Canon, Nikon and Sony. The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM does extremely well.
From Roger:
The conclusions here are pretty simple. If you shoot (or adapt) Canon EF mount lenses the Version II Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS II is excellent. It’s so good that you should only buy the 70-200mm f/2.8 version if you need f/2.8. (Since lots of people want the narrower f/2.8 depth of field for portraits or need all the light they can get for stop-motion action photography, the f/2.8 still will have lots of takers.) Check out all of the MTF charts at Lensrentals.com
Buy the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II | Rent the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II
Thank you, Roger, for so much real news and info.
They make me confident, that my EF 4.0 70-200 i is not the worst choice because I use it most of the time @200mm. And I bought a 1 year old copy in nearly unused condition three years ago for 600 bucks.
But I know and will keep in mind if I use it with a high res (APS-C) camera the version ii might be a tad better @200mm and substantially better at the lower end so maybe I will upgrade later. But for the moment I am relaxed and just that was worth the reading!
My 70-200 F4L (non IS) has developed a problem in the manual focus ring, it slips between the middle two thirds of the range. Autofocus is still perfect. These MTF charts give me confidence that the 70-200F4L IS II will give me sharper images at 200mm when I get round to replace the old one.
Cheers
Stuart
Aha! With the lens a horizontal position it's not that severe, but I tested it in a almost completely vertical position so I could run the focus down a 3 meter long chain that holds the lights. I was lying flat on the ground to get the most distance to the ceiling, which is about 5.5m/18ft high.
Roger does'nt make overlay-charts. He shows the comparisons in mirror charts, for instance canon to the right and Nikon to the left.
I replaced the old non-IS variant which was great for 8 or 10 MPix cameras (APS-C) with the IS version mark i and it's a vast difference on 24 MPix sensors: The images are much crisper and the flare resistance (was a problem in a lot of photos for ME) is vastly improved:
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens Flare Test Results
So while the manual focus problem of your lens is a pitty you will profit vastly from the IS versions overall IQ advantage + the IS system which gives you additional sharpness/contrast with the same shutter speeds!
Both the MTF and Consistency scores are just outstanding. The 100-400 has some of the highest consistency scores of any zoom lens we’ve ever tested. It waxes the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II lens, for example, having far less copy-to-copy variation.
To give you an idea of just how excellent the MTF is on this lens, I’ll put the MTF of the 100-400 IS Mk II side-by-side with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II lens. Now remember, the 100-400 has the advantage of being shot at f/5 here. The 70-200 f/2.8 would have better MTF curves stopped down. The point here is that the 100-400, while not able to compete in aperture with the 70-200, certainly does compete in resolution. And the 70-200 IS II is one of the sharpest zooms made."
Also I would highlight the shorter MFD of the f4 IS II which was the primary reason that caused me to upgrade from the f4 IS I.
I would go for the 70-300 if wildlife is even remotely involved. 200 is just too short for most subjects fox sized and below.