Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 Aug 2010 (Thursday) 12:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200mm f4L IS better than 70-200mm f2.8L IS?

 
shanec26
Member
100 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Mississippi
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:26 |  #1

And I'm referring to the 1st generation 70-200mm f2.8L IS, not the new II version.

Looking at this lens test page
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=4 (external link)

...the f4 version sure looks as good, and in many cases better, than the f2.8 version at any aperture 4.0 smaller.

Am I missing something here or is the f4 version a better lens (at f4 and smaller of course)?


Canon 50D | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS | Tokina 11-16mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,065 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 315
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:36 |  #2

yes, hands down. the new 2.8 is maybe better, or at least the same, with a useable extra stop. but the size/weight is substantial.

but you're original question is the 4IS is sharper.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80
<<all zooms for sale—zeiss, canon & fuji>>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,831 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:38 |  #3

True story.


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,611 posts
Gallery: 51 photos
Likes: 502
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:39 |  #4

When you need 2.8 its not.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G7XII • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
muusers
Goldmember
Avatar
1,024 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Haarlem, Netherlands
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:40 |  #5

I bet the majority on this site cant tell both apart when they both are @ f4 or beyond...

The f4 is sharper than the 2.8 when wide open,.. but hey, the f4 cant do 2.8,,,


50D + 17-55 | s100 | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:41 as a reply to  @ timnosenzo's post |  #6

Depend on what you mean by better, if you need f2.8 it is better than the f4;)


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,894 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:38 |  #7

So Ive been told, but I have always thought my 70-200 2.8 IS was SUPER sharp. I am however considering selling it anyway to upgrade to the Mark II.


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crn3371
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,198 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: SoCal, USA
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:45 |  #8

All of the 70-200 L's are sharp. As already stated, I doubt that most users could tell the difference in real world usage. I'd buy one based on budget and needs, not on sharpness.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shanec26
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
100 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Mississippi
     
Aug 12, 2010 15:34 |  #9

Good point. There are photos of test patterns and then there is real photography. If I bought today, I think it would be 70-200mm f4L IS. Another $1000 or so days I don't need f2.8 THAT bad.


Canon 50D | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS | Tokina 11-16mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aboss3
Goldmember
Avatar
2,616 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: LOS ANGELES
     
Aug 12, 2010 17:10 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

Yep, all depends if one needs an extra stop. When I get my telephoto, it will definitely be f/2.8 due to need for extra light. But before I had f/4 version, and it was tack sharp as well.


Gear | My gear is changing faster than I can update the signature
VoyageEyewear (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adamwynne
Member
Avatar
192 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: England
     
Aug 12, 2010 17:14 |  #11

Its an interesting point, since bumping the ISO up a stop will compensate for the 2.8->4 difference. Ah but what if you want a 1.4x extender? Get a 18MP sensor and crop! LOL!. I love my 2.8, but... sometimes... I wonder if a lighter(ish) smaller(ish) lens wouldn't be more... sensible. :)


http://adamwynne.com (external link)
7D, 50D, 17-55, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, 10-22, 100 f/2.0
-= A picture is worth 0x3E8 words =-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shanec26
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
100 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Mississippi
     
Aug 12, 2010 17:49 |  #12

adamwynne wrote in post #10710434 (external link)
Its an interesting point, since bumping the ISO up a stop will compensate for the 2.8->4 difference. Ah but what if you want a 1.4x extender? Get a 18MP sensor and crop! LOL!. I love my 2.8, but... sometimes... I wonder if a lighter(ish) smaller(ish) lens wouldn't be more... sensible. :)

Question about the extender. I know almost nothing about these except that in some setups they work and in some they do not.

I have a 50D. If I bought either of the 70-200's mentioned here, would an extender work? Which one?


Canon 50D | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS | Tokina 11-16mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,065 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 315
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
     
Aug 12, 2010 18:31 |  #13

canons extenders work with all of the 70-200s. skip the 2x, but the 1.4II is very good. another reason I got the 2.8II was to lose my 300 f4IS, which was never carried on a whim. with a good 2.8 and that extender, I'm at 280 f4 and IS. damn close, and all I have to carry is something smaller than the size and weight of a 50 1.8 (never had one, but I'm guessing).

an f4 70-200 gets you a 5.6 280. kinda lame.

those are all full frame numbers. the 200 becomes 320 and with 1.4 becomes 448. I guess a f5.6 448 isn't bad.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80
<<all zooms for sale—zeiss, canon & fuji>>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woehlerking
Senior Member
Avatar
456 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Canada EH!
     
Aug 12, 2010 20:55 as a reply to  @ mcluckie's post |  #14

F/2.8 lets twice the amount of light hit the sensor that F4 does.
TWICE


gear
https://photography-on-the.net …p=10063848&post​count=2316

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,065 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 315
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
     
Aug 13, 2010 16:28 |  #15

F/2.8 lets twice the amount of light hit the sensor that F4 does.
TWICE

I think we know that.

But what that means to one person is different than the next. For some, its action-stopping sports. I couldn't care less. For me, its a shallower depth of field. I don't think the hand-holdability in dim light is much different -- the weight of the 2.8 make it tougher. At f4, the 4IS is better than the 2.8. Better IQ. Also better at infinity focus at 200mm.

ASIDE:
I think another good question would be is the extra stop on the 4IS and 2.8II(IS) worth the extra bulk and weight. Yeah, yeah, TWICE the light-- but again, that means different things to different shooters. I'm sure sports shooters love it. But I'm not sure the stop of isolation (depth of field reduction) is worth it. I never used to question bringing the f4IS, now that I have the 2.8II, I do.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80
<<all zooms for sale—zeiss, canon & fuji>>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,924 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200mm f4L IS better than 70-200mm f2.8L IS?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Ezra Praveen
1037 guests, 239 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.