I know this thread has been done to death but I have read everything out there and I am still split of which one to get.
My uses will be on a Canon 7D (cropped) used mainly for video but also occasional photography, most likely at conferences inside (mostly with a flash) and on occasionally outside.
I've read the main benefits are the mark ii is slightly sharper but tbh the mark 1 is still very sharp it seems. The big plus to me would be if the Image Stabilisation is really that much better as it says. This is a real benefit to video for me. Has anyone tested the 2 lenses for video and seen a noticeable difference in the IS?
Are you shooting on a tripod or handheld? if on a tripod you turn of IS anyway. I have the 70-200 IS mark ii and it is a great lens and IS is really good. You might find a mark i used for a good price and that may be a fair trade off.