CES 2010: Canon announces the new EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens

[yakim_peled1]

<p>

<p dir="ltr">Just think what they have achieved in the past 2 years and think what would happen by 2020.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

 

[zml]

<blockquote>

<p>it might explain how they got caught sleeping when the D3 and D700 were released, and why they're playing catch-up on certain products</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ah, the power of myth... Nikon did not have a full frame DSLR until 2007 and considering that the Canon's FF DSLR offerings go back to 2002 (1Ds - five years can be considered an eternity in consumer electronics...) I wonder who is really playing catch up. At best (and I'm being very charitable here) Nikon has managed to catch up and now it is a game of one-upmanship, with Nikon a half a stop ahead in noise but badly lagging behind Canon in movie modes, consumer/prosumer offerings and some lenses.</p>

[michael focus97.com lee]

<p>I *really* hope this Mk II version isn't *that* much better in closer focusing and speed (and contrast and sharpness...) My lens arsenal became complete with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and I don't feel like losing a grand to buy this unit. </p>

<p>[i mean, I will if I have to, but I'm hoping it's just a "decent" upgrade.]</p>

<p>On the 50mm front, I'll add some votes for Sigma. Canon's jump from the 50 f/1.4 to their f/1.2 is a HUGE price jump, and I'm nearly certain it cannot be justified next to Sigma's 50 1.4 EX DG HSM. This Sigma lens is far above Canon's 1.4, and much more aligned with their 1.2 in quality and build. The difference in aperture... it's imperceptible. f/1.4 is so tiny that it's tough to use anyway. Still, if done right the darn thing is nicely sharp wide open. </p>