hi all, I have sold a sigma 70-200 to get a canon 70-200 2.8 non IS and I love it, I'm really happy to lose the green tint I was seeing from the sigma and also increased sharpness.
With that in mind I was about to buy another tonight for my 2nd camera operator.. HOWEVER.. I have just used a colleagues cheap canon 18-135 with IS and I was really impressed with the IS (none of my other lenses have it..) so now I'm considering the 70-200L IS (mki)
I know I like the lens and the focual length but I'm predominantly video and not photo so never considered IS necessary (i use tripods for everything) however for the odd times I photograph I like the idea of IS.
My question is, I have read a couple of people say the 70-200 2.8 NON IS is a bit sharper than the 2.8 IS mki but others have disagreed. Whats your opinions? (I'm using on 5d mkii's)
Thanks a lot
With that in mind I was about to buy another tonight for my 2nd camera operator.. HOWEVER.. I have just used a colleagues cheap canon 18-135 with IS and I was really impressed with the IS (none of my other lenses have it..) so now I'm considering the 70-200L IS (mki)
I know I like the lens and the focual length but I'm predominantly video and not photo so never considered IS necessary (i use tripods for everything) however for the odd times I photograph I like the idea of IS.
My question is, I have read a couple of people say the 70-200 2.8 NON IS is a bit sharper than the 2.8 IS mki but others have disagreed. Whats your opinions? (I'm using on 5d mkii's)
Thanks a lot