Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of an upgrade/refresh of their stabilized 70-200 f/2.8 L series lens mostly ranges from head-scratching 'why did they bother' to soul-crushing disenchantment and vows to abandon Canon forever. The rumors run-up to the announcement seems to have engendered an expectation that some un-imaginably phenomenal level of improvement must underlay the Mark II to Mark III transition of the f/2.8 version.
In the event, the actual announced improvements to that lens are improved external and internal coatings. The internal coatings referred to are described as Sub Wave-length structure Coating (SWC) and the new silicone-dioxide air film air sphere coating. This combination is said to provide increased resistance to flare caused by internal reflections from glass lens-surfaces at lens - air interfaces. Flourine coating on the exterior lens surfaces is expected to improve smudge resistance.
The other modification is the replacement of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM Mark II's subtle sepia-tone light putty colored off-white paint with a cooler bluish-gray off-white finish on the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM III.
I have never noticed any objectionable or undue propensity to flare and ghosting in my copy of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM II. While that could simply mean that I have not challenged either myself or the lens as much as I ought to have, there seem not to have been many complaints from others on that score. Unless looking at the old yellowish putty color induces GAS, I'll not be looking to upgrade.
However, given that the Mark III lens' price, as announced, is not an increase over the Mark II's sticker price, Canon should be praised for offering an upgrade of an already superb lens which incorporates their improved coating technology. People who are satisfied with the Mark II version are not injured, and people who have waited to see what the new version of the lens offered probably will not have grounds for disappointment.
Orson Burleigh wrote:
Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of an upgrade/refresh of their stabilized 70-200 f/2.8 L series lens mostly ranges from head-scratching 'why did they bother' to soul-crushing disenchantment and vows to abandon Canon forever. The rumors run-up to the announcement seems to have engendered an expectation that some un-imaginably phenomenal level of improvement must underlay the Mark II to Mark III transition of the f/2.8 version.
In the event, the actual announced improvements to that lens are improved external and internal coatings. The internal coatings referred to are described as Sub Wave-length structure Coating (SWC) and the new silicone-dioxide air film air sphere coating. This combination is said to provide increased resistance to flare caused by internal reflections from glass lens-surfaces at lens - air interfaces. Flourine coating on the exterior lens surfaces is expected to improve smudge resistance.
The other modification is the replacement of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM Mark II's subtle sepia-tone light putty colored off-white paint with a cooler bluish-gray off-white finish on the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM III.
I have never noticed any objectionable or undue propensity to flare and ghosting in my copy of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM II. While that could simply mean that I have not challenged either myself or the lens as much as I ought to have, there seem not to have been many complaints from others on that score. Unless looking at the old yellowish putty color induces GAS, I'll not be looking to upgrade.
However, given that the Mark III lens' price, as announced, is not an increase over the Mark II's sticker price, Canon should be praised for offering an upgrade of an already superb lens which incorporates their improved coating technology. People who are satisfied with the Mark II version are not injured, and people who have waited to see what the new version of the lens offered probably will not have grounds for disappointment.
Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of a... (
show quote)
When the MII version came out, there already made the claim of having the white color changed to match the whiter color of the super teles, as well as having placed fluorine coating to the outer surfaces for smudge resistance!
sb
Loc: Florida's East Coast
Oh, good! That means there will be more used II's on the market!
I remain happy with my II version and will carry on...
Best,
Todd Ferguson
The II is a great lens that doesn't need much improving on in my opinion. The big advantage of the new III will be the crashing of price of the II for those that want real quality, but just can't justify the admission price. I have already noticed that the II is dropping a bit, and should be more in the coming weeks.
Bill
Orson Burleigh wrote:
Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of an upgrade/refresh of their stabilized 70-200 f/2.8 L series lens mostly ranges from head-scratching 'why did they bother' to soul-crushing disenchantment and vows to abandon Canon forever. The rumors run-up to the announcement seems to have engendered an expectation that some un-imaginably phenomenal level of improvement must underlay the Mark II to Mark III transition of the f/2.8 version.
In the event, the actual announced improvements to that lens are improved external and internal coatings. The internal coatings referred to are described as Sub Wave-length structure Coating (SWC) and the new silicone-dioxide air film air sphere coating. This combination is said to provide increased resistance to flare caused by internal reflections from glass lens-surfaces at lens - air interfaces. Flourine coating on the exterior lens surfaces is expected to improve smudge resistance.
The other modification is the replacement of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM Mark II's subtle sepia-tone light putty colored off-white paint with a cooler bluish-gray off-white finish on the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM III.
I have never noticed any objectionable or undue propensity to flare and ghosting in my copy of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM II. While that could simply mean that I have not challenged either myself or the lens as much as I ought to have, there seem not to have been many complaints from others on that score. Unless looking at the old yellowish putty color induces GAS, I'll not be looking to upgrade.
However, given that the Mark III lens' price, as announced, is not an increase over the Mark II's sticker price, Canon should be praised for offering an upgrade of an already superb lens which incorporates their improved coating technology. People who are satisfied with the Mark II version are not injured, and people who have waited to see what the new version of the lens offered probably will not have grounds for disappointment.
Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of a... (
show quote)
Canon might have improved automation in manufacture of the new lens, also perhaps the electronics are optimised for the new mirrorless offerings coming.
It is interesting.
davidrb
Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel
speters wrote:
When the MII version came out, there already made the claim of having the white color changed to match the whiter color of the super teles, as well as having placed fluorine coating to the outer surfaces for smudge resistance!
Haven't we discovered that Canon changes the tint in their "big whites" every few years? All the "whites" get the same color, regardless of size.
Orson Burleigh wrote:
Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of an upgrade/refresh of their stabilized 70-200 f/2.8 L series lens mostly ranges from head-scratching 'why did they bother' to soul-crushing disenchantment and vows to abandon Canon forever. The rumors run-up to the announcement seems to have engendered an expectation that some un-imaginably phenomenal level of improvement must underlay the Mark II to Mark III transition of the f/2.8 version.
In the event, the actual announced improvements to that lens are improved external and internal coatings. The internal coatings referred to are described as Sub Wave-length structure Coating (SWC) and the new silicone-dioxide air film air sphere coating. This combination is said to provide increased resistance to flare caused by internal reflections from glass lens-surfaces at lens - air interfaces. Flourine coating on the exterior lens surfaces is expected to improve smudge resistance.
The other modification is the replacement of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM Mark II's subtle sepia-tone light putty colored off-white paint with a cooler bluish-gray off-white finish on the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM III.
I have never noticed any objectionable or undue propensity to flare and ghosting in my copy of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM II. While that could simply mean that I have not challenged either myself or the lens as much as I ought to have, there seem not to have been many complaints from others on that score. Unless looking at the old yellowish putty color induces GAS, I'll not be looking to upgrade.
However, given that the Mark III lens' price, as announced, is not an increase over the Mark II's sticker price, Canon should be praised for offering an upgrade of an already superb lens which incorporates their improved coating technology. People who are satisfied with the Mark II version are not injured, and people who have waited to see what the new version of the lens offered probably will not have grounds for disappointment.
Early reaction to Canon's recent announcement of a... (
show quote)
I was not aware of the mklll version coming out.
BUT, I do know that Canon has never released a new version without improving both the IQ AND the IS.
My hunch is also that the new lens will be optimized to work with the new crop of mirrorless cameras and possibly be better suited or have features optimizing use for video as well, for which the mirrorless might be catering to as well, but that's just my opinion!
The color alone might be a reason to buy it though!!! LoL
SS
Notorious T.O.D. wrote:
I remain happy with my II version and will carry on...
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Now I will definitely wait for the lll version to come out, so I can get a cheaper ll version!!! LoL
SS
Just wait until the fatal flaw is pointed out by the Nikon camp..."It is a Canon...". Then the prices will fall...LOL
SharpShooter wrote:
Now I will definitely wait for the lll version to come out, so I can get a cheaper ll version!!! LoL
SS
sb wrote:
Oh, good! That means there will be more used II's on the market!
That was the first thought I had!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.