Will you be using Canon L lenses on Epic?

[Adam C Lubkin]

I'm wondering who will be going the Canon electronic still lens route on the Epic, and for those are, which lenses you expect to use.

[christopher witzke]

Yes!

My fav on the red1 is my 24. 1.4L.... But the 35. 1.4L, 50 1.2, 16-35, 70-200 2.8, 100 micro L are all fantastic!

I have no idea what to do with my birger and impero when my epic arrives....??

[Tom Lowe]

YES.

8-15mm fisheye, 14mm 2.8 II, 16-35mm II, 24mm 1.4 II, 50mm 1.2, 70-200mm II.

But the one I'm looking forward to most on Epic X is the Canon EF 600mm f/4!!

[Meryem Ersoz]

I would love to permanently Canon-ize a SCARLET FF35, if I don't wind up with way too many cameras along the way. Lots of lenses.

The two I am most looking forward to are the legendary 200mm 1.8, best lens I've ever owned texturally speaking, and a Sigma 300-800mm zoom, if the system can read the aperture settings...

[Elsie N]

I won't be using the Canon lenses, but expect delivery sometime tomorrow of a Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens . Next I will purchase an AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED.

Would love to use RED lenses but this is the compromise I must make to man up.

Edit: Looking at substituting the
AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Wide Angle Zoom Lens for the previously mentioned 17-35mm. Not as fast but supposedly a very sharp lens by all the reviews I've read.

[Tom Gleeson]

As a low cost PLmount/Preston alternative the Canon lenses are an exciting prospect. What I will need to see is how smooth and finely can the internal motors on these lenses change focus and will the Redmote be a practical focus controller that my AC wont throw at me.

I cant imagine not using PL Cine glass on my Epic but as a low cost effective alternative for the budget challenged shoots.

I have a dream that Canon will sell a new line of lenses that are modified for Cine use as this would be a match made in heaven for Epic and Canon HDSLR shooters

[Adam C Lubkin]

What I will need to see is how smooth and finely can the internal motors on these lenses change focus and will the Redmote be a practical focus controller that my AC wont throw at me.

I'm really curious about this as well. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

Also, as someone who often shoots hand-held, I'm wondering if footage shot with IS on looks okay when projected on a big screen. My dslr IS footage looks fine on a 42" monitor, but I haven't had a chance to see it really big.

[Adam C Lubkin]

Any thoughts on the 24-105 f4? I'm trying to find a good zoom for fast-moving documentary situations where I need to cover from semi-wide to portrait. I wish it went slightly wider, and f4 isn't always fast enough, but maybe it'll do... The 24-70 might be a better choice but a physically smaller lens would be preferable. On apc-c I use the 17-55mm 2.8, but it seems there's nothing in that range for the s35s. Anybody else struggling with this?

[Kim Frank]

I really don't like the rendering of the CANON lenses. They are too soft and warm for my taste. It always looks a bit muddy IMO. I love zeiss ZF lenses. As it's easier to soften an image then sharpen it and the colors are more what I like, for me they are the best low Cost sollution at the Moment.

[Tom Lowe]

As Jarred pointed out the other day, the main problem with still lenses right now is still breathing... a tough problem to get around.

Adam, I've heard that the 24-105 is soft on the long end. 24-70 would probably be better, and it matches well with the 70-200 in terms of covering focal lengths.

[Adam C Lubkin]

Thanks Tom. What are you going to be shooting with that 600mm?

[Aaron McAdam]

Thanks Tom. What are you going to be shooting with that 600mm?

I believe he will be shooting "Awesome" (as in whatever he points his EPIC at)

[Tom Lowe]

Thanks Tom. What are you going to be shooting with that 600mm?

Probably people and wildlife mostly. I can't even imagine how incredible that 600mm stuff is going to look at 5K RAW. Just fooling around with the 600mm f/4 on a 7D in video mode, the depth of field and bokeh are so beautiful, it makes just about any shot look incredible.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Yes, owning a few more Canons hopefully, as well as other Canon mount lenses like the 11-16 Tokina. ZFs maybe... Renting cine lenses as needed. I don't really need gear though, and that is why this is such a great option to have.

Wonder if future L series lenses will be built to breathe less?

[Evin Grant]

Not Canon, but Nikon G in addition to my PL mount glass. Specifically the 14-24/24-70/70-200 F2.8 combo. Also the new 24/35/50/85 1.4 glass looks very impressive, and a couple generations ahead of the Canon fast primes.

[Adam C Lubkin]

Evin, in your tests have you compared the Canon L line against current Nikons for cinema use? Also, is the Nikon mount more stable than the EOS? Although I have a Canon camera and glass currently, it's a modest kit and I can start from scratch with Epic if there's a compelling reason to go one way or another.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Yes off course, even so truly hope for a Leica S mount as well :), but not for Motion Picture work.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Not Canon, but Nikon G in addition to my PL mount glass. Specifically the 14-24/24-70/70-200 F2.8 combo. Also the new 24/35/50/85 1.4 glass looks very impressive, and a couple generations ahead of the Canon fast primes.

Glad to see someone else mention a 24-70mm. With a 5k sensor I think it will be a much more usable range. Anyone know an approximation of the S35 equivalent FOV 24mm will provide? Somewhere around 18-21mm?

[Dan Kanes]

I really don't like the rendering of the CANON lenses. They are too soft and warm for my taste. It always looks a bit muddy IMO. I love zeiss ZF lenses. As it's easier to soften an image then sharpen it and the colors are more what I like, for me they are the best low Cost sollution at the Moment.

Agreed.

canon can go to hell.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'll be shooting a lot of Nikon glass on my Epics. In addition to PL. I'll buy one Canon mount as I do have Canon glass as well, but I prefer my Nikon glass. I'll be using the 14-24, 17-35, 24-70 and 70-200. In addition, various assorted Nikkor primes; 14mm, 24mm, 35, 50, 85, 105mm macro, etc.. Also the fantastic Tokina 11-16 that I own in both Nikon and the Duclos PL conversion. I can't wait to shoot Epic with the Canon 17mm tilt-shift. I'd buy the Canon mount just to use that lens.

@ Roberto,

A 24mm focal length on 5K should give you a 59.9 degree AOV. Full aperture S35 (24.89mm wide) would be a 54.8 degree AOV. For 4K, the AOV would be about 49.5 degrees. Going the other direction, FF35 would have a 73.7 degree AOV with a 24mm focal length.

A 24-70 zoom when shooting 5K would be equivalent to:

21.6 - 63mm on S35
19.2 - 56mm on 4K
31.2 - 91.15mm on FF35

[Roberto Lequeux]

Thanks Jeff!

[Sam Taylor]

For wildlife filming I will be using 200mm F2.8, 300mm F4 IS and 400mm F4 DO IS

[Sanjin Jukic]

Definitely I'll be using all available still glass from Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Sigma, etc...

but must say that nothing can compare with the latest aspherical lens design from Leica.

Why?

Just because it is one of the best lens performances at all apertures with a minimum lens aberrations.

Second to that they are all lightweight also means almost ideal lenses for Epic/Scarlet handheld, cheaper steadicam like stabilizers, etc,...

Have a look at these two short test clips:

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/LeicaApoSummicronM75mm_mirror.jpg
Shot on RED1 MX with Leica Apo Summicron M 75mm f/2.0 @ wide open f/2.0, ISO 800, 1/50, 25 fps, shot at elevator mirror with neon lighting.

Download short clip 7.9 MB >>>> (http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/LeicaApoSummicronM75mm_mirror.m4v)

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/Noctilux_F095_04.jpg
Shot on RED1-M with Leica Noctilux M 50mm f/0.95 wide open @ f/0.95, ISO 320, 1/50, 25 fps, neon indoor lighting.

Download short clip 17.7 MB >>>> (http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/Noctilux_F095_03.mov)

[Shane Betts]

I'll certainly be ordering the Canon mount with the Epic and testing our Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, Canon L 16-35 f2.8, Canon L 28-70mm f2.8 and Canon L 70-200 f2.8 kit on it.

As for how this will all perform, only time and testing will tell. But I have my fingers crossed for the lighter weight, lower cost and touchscreen focusing abilities of stills glass.

[Vance Colvig]

Nikon

[Steve Gibby]

I'll use all four of the new Red mounts with Epic: Red Electronic, Canon, Nikon, PL. The mounts can be changed out in about 1 minute, then just a quick flange focal distance adjustment (moveable sensor block). That opens up a lot of production possibilities...

Zooms are almost always the most practical choice for the mobile EFP style production me and my crews do - documentaries, nature, sports, music, travel, lifestyle, wildlife, etc. Tip: Parfocal construction zooms hold focus quite well throughout the full range of a zoom

On Epic we'll use the following:

PL
Canon 150-600 f5.6L zoom (stock Canon lens) with Century PL mount conversion (mount only).
Note: We've been using this lens on Red One for years now with great results

Canon
16-35 f2.8 MKll
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8L IS ll

Nikon
11-16 f2.8 (Tokina with Nikon mount)
14-24 f2.8
17-35 f2.8
24-70 f2.8
28-70 f2.8
80-200 f2.8 AF (telescope zoom, twist rack model)
50-300 f4.5 AIS
200-400 f4
Note: We've been using all of the above Nikon zooms on Red One for years now with great results

Red Electronic
I have great hopes for the Red Electronic Lenses. IMO they will be designed to completely "dance" with Epic and Scarlet. If Red makes a wide zoom, mid zoom, medium zoom, and long zoom I'll buy them all - and if they perform on Epic like I think they will, and their optics and electronic features are what I think they'll be, I'll most likely sell off my Nikon and Canon lenses and transition to strictly using the Red Electronic Lenses.

Take my word for it...there are some real fun times ahead in field production with Epic - and Scarlet :)

[Adam C Lubkin]

Gibby, given your experience with comparable zooms from both Canon and Nikon (the wide, med, and tele 2.8s), do you have a preference or notice much of a difference between the two makes?

[Steve Gibby]

Gibby, given your experience with comparable zooms from both Canon and Nikon (the wide, med, and tele 2.8s), do you have a preference or notice much of a difference between the two makes?

The top-level zooms from Nikon and Canon compete head to head in the same market space - thus they all have good glass and mechanics. With that in mind, a lot of lens usage choices boil down to the shooter's taste in contrast, bokeh, field of view, etc. I have the Canon L series zooms because my primary DSLR system is Canon (5D). The Canon zooms I listed are all excellent lenses. I have the 20 year old Canon 150-600 because it is great glass for what I do - and nobody makes a comparable focal length lens, let alone one in that focal length which is that light (9 pounds). I've also owned Nikon SLR and DSLR cameras most of my professional life. Overall my favorite zooms on Red One have been Nikon. Early on Red, Underdahl, and others made Nikon mounts for Red - and in the mobile EFP work I do I need light weight rigs and mobility - thus my early move to Nikon zooms on Red.

I'm not necessarily a "Nikon guy" or "Canon guy" when it comes to lenses - but rather a "whatever make of lens is the best choice for the shots I need to get that day" type of guy. In general Nikon lenses tend to generate a bit "cooler" image, while Canon lenses tend to generate a bit "warmer" image. When we used to shoot film with those lenses, then upfront lens choices were critical to a project. But now that we shoot Raw in both our DSLR and Red, with its inherent ability to accept curves and "tweaking" in post, IMO the brand choice of lens is nowhere near as critical as it used to be in terms of the "look" of the image generated at the point of acquisition. Still critical in a zoom choice though are the other properties of the zoom - I.E. breathing (or lack thereof), holding focus through a zoom, lack of aberrations (CA, etc.), build quality, weight, acceptance of filters, etc.

I don't use PL cine zooms on Red because frankly they're too expensive and heavy per their focal lengths for the highly mobile EFP work me and my crews do - plus we don't do union work, we don't do straight narrative work, and our productions are usually for television broadcast. 35mm still lenses are excellent optically, lightweight, affordable, and easy to use in our screw-on filter work flow (no matte box) - plus we eye focus by operator (no follow focus - we rack focus on the lens barrel). Beyond all this, Epic (and Scarlet) are DSMC cameras, designed to be used for both the motion and stills acquisition. Over the years me and my crews have regularly shot motion Raw and stills Raw on location - but until Epic that required us to have Red One for motion Raw, and a DSLR for stills Raw. With Epic (and Scarlet) we can use one camera for both motion Raw and stills Raw - and have the option of four different mounts, three of which give us lightweight electronic lens choices for our work.

Hope this explanation helps you...there are many ways to use, lens, and accessorize a Red camera - including Epic. Open minds gravitate to what works best for the genres they work in. Its a lot easier to make these kinds of alternative equipment choices in a non-union, indie environment - which is my chosen workspace.

[D Fuller]

Not Canon, but Nikon G in addition to my PL mount glass. Specifically the 14-24/24-70/70-200 F2.8 combo. Also the new 24/35/50/85 1.4 glass looks very impressive, and a couple generations ahead of the Canon fast primes.

Same here. Plus the Tokina 11-16 and the 10.5mm Nikkor DX fisheye on occasion.

[Michael Hastings]

A 24mm focal length on 5K should give you a 59.9 degree AOV. Full aperture S35 (24.89mm wide) would be a 54.8 degree AOV. For 4K, the AOV would be about 49.5 degrees. Going the other direction, FF35 would have a 73.7 degree AOV with a 24mm focal length.

A 24-70 zoom when shooting 5K would be equivalent to:

21.6 - 63mm on S35
19.2 - 56mm on 4K
31.2 - 91.15mm on FF35

Jeff you seem to be up on this stuff. Is there supposed to be a micro four thirds mount in the works? Obviously it would cover scarlet 2/3 but I'm also wondering what the pixel dimensions on the epic-x would be for a 16:9 within the 4/3 coverage. There's a lot of bang for the buck in lenses like the panny 7-14, 14-140 with IS, and the Olympus 9-18. And I'm guessing about 3.5K? Which might be a nice sweet spot for high frame rates, hdrx dual files with reasonable storage, 3D, etc.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

There has been several requests and discussions over the feasibility of a micro 4/3 Scarlet and possibly an m4/3 mount that would fit on all the cameras. The 4/3 imager area is 18mm x 13.5mm so it falls somewhere between the 2/3" and S35 formats. Most current m4/3 cameras are a touch smaller than than that full dimension, they record closer to 17.25mm x 12.8mm.

If you were to use m4/3 lenses on Scarlet 2/3", it would more than cover and there would be about a 1.8X horizontal crop on 2/3" in relation to what you would get with a m4/3 camera. You would have some trouble finding focal lengths to fill that wide end on the 2/3" sensor -- the 7mm is about the widest there is on m4/3, but wides on 2/3" can go as far as about 3.5mm or so. IMO, it would make little sense to use m4/3 lenses on 2/3" Scarlet... Not as crazy as using "35mm" SLR lenses, but still not ideal.

Micro 4/3 lenses on S35 Scarlet or Epic would most likely vignette at all but the longest focal lengths. On the S35 MX sensor, the 18x13.5 area would give you a pixel resolution of 3333 x 2500. It's a severe horizontal crop, but due to the MX sensor's 1.9:1 aspect, you can get close to the full recordable height, probably all of it as the lens' coverage is circular. 5K MX max recordable area is 5120x2700. With m4/3 lenses you may be able to pull off something like 3400x2700, and probably a bit wider, especially with medium to longer focal lengths. So a micro 4/3 mount for the S35 Scarlet/Epic may be an interesting option.

I don't see RED making a micro 4/3 version of Scarlet -- it's somewhat of a proprietary format with only Panasonic and Olympus using it. I suppose it's possible they, or someone, will offer up a mount though.

[Stephen Pruitt]

IF we do Stage III (a big if at the moment), we'll definitely be staying with our Canon glass. We have eight different lenses to choose from (comments on each in parenthesis):

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 (gotta love this lens in tight spaces. . . incredible for car shots, etc.)
Canon 16-35 II f2.8 (our go-to for our Actioncam set-up outdoors and some tight work)
Canon 24mm II f1.4 (a terrific wide lens. . . just right for most normal rooms and low-light steadycam shots)
Canon 35mm II f1.4 (another terrific "normal" lens; probably our favorite lens for this film for most shooting situations)
Canon 50mm II f1.2 (our second favorite lens for most shooting situations and for getting closer)
Canon 85mm II f1.2 (for a really great close-up, this is the golden boy of the group)
Canon 100mm II Macro f2.0 (a terrific lens for super tight macro work, but I find the focus drifts a bit when using the Birger; our may not be perfect in that respect)
Canon 200mm II f2.8 (we almost never use this lens, but it's amazing if you need to get that close)

As for breathing, yeah, it's an issue from time to time, but not very often. And for the price of Angenieux zoom, you can have an entire bag of great Canon glass, IR+ND filters, etc, and still have money to spare. For our productions and our purposes, it is no contest.

Stephen

[Adam C Lubkin]

A lot of mention of the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 . Given that this is a DX/APS-C lens, will it cover the Epic sensor or will it lose some of its range?

[Blair S. Paulsen]

AFAIK the initial Epic shipped will be an S35 sensor model so I would expect very similar coverage with my Tokina 11-16 (Duclos PL) to my current RedOne.

In terms of Canon L glass I love my 24mm T1.4 and 70-200 T2.8 zoom. Some of that is due to my personal appreciation for the warmer, more "lifelike" skin tones vs Nikon but everyone is entitled to their opinion. I have not done a proper comparison but I have been impressed with the way the coatings on the L series Canons to handle shooting directly into lights/sun.

FWIW I am most pumped up about the prospect of quick and easy mount changes so I can select any lens I want without the time penalty inherent on my current configuration. Niiice.

Cheers - #19

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Epic sensor recordable area is essentially 27.65mm wide. which is about the same width as Canon APS-H. But it's not very tall, so the image circle to cover is just a bit under 32mm. Many S35 and most APS-C lenses should cover it. As it is now, the Tokina 11-16 covers 35mm full frame at 15mm and up. You can see coverage examples from Ken Rockwell -- http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm

I'm betting the Tokina 11-16 will be just fine on Epic from at least 13mm and longer, possibly even fine at around 12mm when shooting 5K 2:1, maybe even all the way to 11mm. Can't say for sure until we put it on an Epic. I suppose I could shoot it on a Nikon D3 and figure it out... But I'm just eyeing it.

[Matt Uhry]

We've got a few PL lenses kicking around so I'll probably stick with them, but if it was a Canon L or Nikon choice: I'd go Nikon.

Nikon lenses are built for the long haul.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[JD Holloway]

All my teles are Canon based.
200 1.8 L (currently B mount) I'm PL'ing it
300 2.8 L B mount (converting it)
300 2.8 L PL mount -Highly modified with rear dual stage Matte Box
400 2.8 L (the Beast)

The 300mm is reasonably light and if I only had one tele lens to travel with it would be in the bag.

[Lauri Kettunen]

I really don't like the rendering of the CANON lenses. They are too soft and warm for my taste. It always looks a bit muddy IMO.

There are Canon L series lenses which are very sharp and some which are pretty soft. The CANON EF 28-300/3.5-5.6L IS USM is soft whereas the CANON EF 100/2.8 USM MACRO and CANON EF 800/5.6 L IS USM are amazingly sharpe. Also the CANON EF 70-200/2.8 L IS USM II is very sharp taken into account it's a zoom.

[JD Holloway]

@ Lauri

Yup, Canon has a number of dogs.

[Evin Grant]

...so the image circle to cover is just a bit under 32mm.

31.25mm extrapolated from Jim's latest post.


The Abel chart is a bit misleading with regards to EPIC.

Sensor size (recordable area):
EPIC: 27.65mm x 14.58

Resolutions:
EPIC: 5120x2700, 5120x2560, 5120x2160, 4096x2304, 3840x2160, etc

Jim

Of course since this is a 1.89 aspect ratio we can determine the following image circles for the three common aspect ratios at 5K, 2:1=30.91 2.35:1=30.00 1.77:1=29.64

Remember any lens designed to cover Super 35mm film will have a coverage of 31mm or greater, that is not to say corner performance will be exemplary as Jim has pointed out, but the image circle should cover.

[Sven Seynaeve]

I'll use canon zooms for sure, especially for sports.
thinking about the sigma 200-500 2.8??? would this workl, I guess so..

all other pl zooms are way to expensive ....

Looking forward to the Red electronic lenses aswell.????? But when will they be here??

[Roberto Lequeux]

How big of a difference is there from the 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM I to the IS USM II?

I should google this, bet there are several comparisons with examples...

Is there any particularly good comparison I should read?

[Adam C Lubkin]

Apparently there's a big difference. There's lots of rumors about the 24-70 being updated in the coming months too.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

[Roberto Lequeux]

Perfect. I like reading his reviews and he has MTF charts to compare. Thank you!

[Adam C Lubkin]

It took me some searching to find the info that Jim posted about the upcoming Red Electronic Lenses. To save others the trouble, I've copied Jim's quotes from this thread: http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48362&highlight=electronic

Jim's quotes:

Don't forget... we have a RED AF lens program. Our lenses are cinema grade with well controlled breathing. They also will cover FF35. 1st lens is the 24-75mm F2.8. There is a wide zoom and a long zoom to follow.

Focus is manual, one touch on the run-stop button, touchscreen or Pro REDmote. Single or continuous... and tracking. Also... rate control. The system is designed to work with Canon, Nikon and other programs, but will work best with RED lenses. No surprise.


Some of the algorithms are tricky and we are working hard to get them right. We have to characterize each lens... a few are difficult. Obviously all the RED lenses will work perfectly because we designed them to do so...

So far, we have about 10 Canon and 10 Nikon lenses done. More work to do.

One big difference in the RED lenses, besides much less breathing, is the motors. They are better and faster. Our lenses will be bigger, but the difference will be clear.

We aren't ready... but we are getting there.


And lenses will be added by firmware upgrades as we go. However, we won't ship cameras until we have a full compliment of lens options.

Remember that you can also ignore all the AF stuff and just use PL mount lenses.


Originally Posted by Mohammed El Sharqawy
and what are the second best lenses performing with the new focus system canon or nikon.. etc??
It depends on the focal lengths if you are being critical. There is a big step down from the RED lenses to the Canons and Nikons because they were not designed for motion. The breathing is an issue (as you already know). Both companies make great lenses for stills. Hard to tell them apart in most cases. Where we can see a difference on the lens projector, you probably couldn't tell in real shooting situations.

We do understand that many people already own one of these companies lenses (or both). We want to give our customers as many options as possible.


I have worked with this AF a bit and I can see a few ways to use it. If you have talent that is 9' 6" away, you can tape it off and set it with your lens scale... assuming the lens and back-focus are dead nuts. Or you can visually set it with your EVF, LCD or external monitor. Or you can touchscreen it and get it dead on, then rack focus manually as they move. But you know you started with perfect focus. Really... you need to see this. Each will find a different way to add it to the arsenal. Or not. MF is always an option... just like you have always done. But my bet is that most will find a way to embrace this technology, not unlike how the still world has with DSLRs. Options are good. Trust me when I tell you this is a good option.


What we are doing with AF is a long process with a ton of opportunities to add possibilities. Plan on it working when the cameras are shipped. Then plan on it getting better with more options as time passes.


Originally Posted by Peter Majtan
Jim, just to bump up the same question again - any (even rough) ETA and pricing for the electronic RED zoom(s)? 2010? Bellow $5K/$10K/lens?

Peter
This year (late) and under $10K. (the 24-75)

It is smaller and lighter than the 18-85mm.

[Justin McAleece]

How big of a difference is there from the 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM I to the IS USM II?

I should google this, bet there are several comparisons with examples...

Is there any particularly good comparison I should read?

IT'S WAY BETTER. Use the IS once on your RED for video with the new lens and you will be amazed. The new one is AWESOME.

[Lauri Kettunen]

Is there any particularly good comparison I should read?

In addition to

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

also

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/510-canon_70200_2is28