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 07 Sep 2010 (Tuesday) 00:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 70-200 order of sharpness?

 
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,340 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 199
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
Sep 09, 2010 07:08 |  #61

Right, if we're talking stopped down then, stopped down to what...f8-f10-f22? We've got to be talking wide open. The op asked about IQ not versatility.


My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TaDa
...as cool as Perry
Avatar
6,742 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: New York
     
Sep 09, 2010 07:22 |  #62

Well, I've owned all. For those that have not used the 2.8 non-IS, it's a killer lens. Sharpness wise, it's sharper than the f/4 and 2.8 IS. That being said, they're all great lenses once the images are worked on in post and printed. The one thing that absolutely amazes me with the new 2.8 IS is the micro-contrast. The details with this lens are amazing.


Name is Peter and here is my gear:
Canon 5D II, Canon 7D, Canon 40D
Glass - Zeiss 21 f/2.8 ZE, Canon 35 f/1.4L, Canon 40 f/2.8 STM, Canon 24-70 f/2.8
L, Canon 85 f/1.2L II, Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 500 f/4L IS
Speedlite 580ex II, 430ex - Gitzo GT-3541XLS w/ Arca B1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gee9iner
Member
Avatar
31 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Sep 09, 2010 07:22 |  #63

Just bought the f4/L IS USM, and very happy with just the recent test shots, cant wait for some outdoor fun on weekend, but here is a sample of a shot of my partner

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

E0S 550D, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mpix345
Goldmember
2,870 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Dec 2006
     
Sep 09, 2010 07:40 as a reply to  @ gee9iner's post |  #64

What's sort of obvious here is that the differences in sharpness are probably not enough to worry about for most people. You need to pick the 70-200 that fits your needs and budget.

I did a bunch of research before buying my F4 nonIS a few months back. I knew my main use would be outdoor sports. Given that, I didn't want to pay for IS, and while I would have liked to go 2.8 it really didn't seem to be worth the cost or size/weight. Diminishing returns for me, being an amateur taking pics of family and friends. Different story if that lens helps pay the mortgage though, I'm sure.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Patrick.TeSeng
Member
Avatar
57 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Manila, Philippines
     
Sep 09, 2010 09:00 |  #65

Interesting discussion here.

I currently have both f/4 non-is and the f/2.8 IS Mk I. The image quality and sharpness of the f/4 non-IS wide open compares well with the f2.8 IS Mk I at f/4. With today's cleaner high ISO DSLRs it is even usable indoors.

I like it so much that I'm having a hard time letting go of the f/4L. It's sharp, sturdy, light to travel with, and it's one of the more affordable (if not the most affordable) L lens there.

It's currently part of my travel kit.

That said, I bought the f/2.8 IS not because I wanted sharper lens, but for the additional features it has over the f/4L: ability to shoot one stop faster (e.g. being able to shoot at f/2.8 1/60sec vs. 1/30sec at f/4 indoors, which can make the difference in capturing a moving subject), the image stabilization, and weatherproofing, and included tripod collar ring (it comes with the package :))

The f/4L IS and f/2.8L IS Mk II may be sharper wide open if sharpness is strictly what we will be considering, but that doesn't mean that the f/2.8 IS, f/4L non-IS and f/2.8L non-IS (haven't used this last one yet) are shabby.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikekelley
"Meow! Bark! Honk! Hiss! Grrr! Tweet!"
Avatar
7,317 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Sep 09, 2010 12:56 |  #66

MOkoFOko wrote in post #10863370 (external link)
It's decent... but it's at the very BOTTOM of the list when it comes to sharpness (below even the f/2.8 non-IS). In this case you do get what you pay for. .


this is just simply not true.


Los Angeles-Based Architectural, Interior, And Luxury Real Estate Photography (external link)
How To Photograph Real Estate and Architecture (external link)
My Fine Art Galleries (external link)
My articles at Fstoppers.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,831 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Sep 09, 2010 13:06 |  #67

mikekelley wrote in post #10879219 (external link)
this is just simply not true.

agreed


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alpha_1976
Goldmember
Avatar
3,960 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2009
Location: USA
     
Sep 09, 2010 14:09 |  #68

I seriously believe magic drainpipe beats 70-200mm f2.8 IS and non-IS in sharpness.


I know more about gear than I know about photography :p
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
orbitechgr
Goldmember
Avatar
1,075 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jul 2010
     
Sep 09, 2010 14:23 as a reply to  @ alpha_1976's post |  #69

I have the 70-200 f4L and I have to say that I'm very happy with its results.. Definitely worth its money very good price/performance..
Last week I shot with it soccer under artificial light, and was actually impressed on how sharp the images were even @ 200mm.. IS version of this would come more handy though in certain situations..


Gear
Flickr (external link)
Jim

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cptrios
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Boston, USA / Burgundy, France
     
Sep 09, 2010 18:08 |  #70

alpha_1976 wrote in post #10879642 (external link)
I seriously believe magic drainpipe beats 70-200mm f2.8 IS and non-IS in sharpness.

Agreed. The f/2.8 IS II has it beat, though. The f/4 IS, I think, is pretty much on par.


Fuji X100 / Sony NEX-7 / Contax G 45mm f/2 / The ghosts of 3 Canon bodies past / A meagre amount of talent
My weak lil' 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tancanon58
Senior Member
Avatar
965 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: southern california
     
Sep 09, 2010 18:18 |  #71

Wow, f4 IS is an IQ monger huh? Now I know which one to get.
_______________
I have own the f4 IS before and loved it. But since I got f2.8 IS II I sold f4 IS with no doubt.


Bodies: 5D MkIII/ Oly ED-M5/ G10
Lenses: Tamron SP 24-70 2.8 Di VC /and some Panny and Oly lenses.
Flash: Canon600EX RT.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Sep 09, 2010 18:50 |  #72

timnosenzo wrote in post #10874927 (external link)
Bull****. If I'm buying the heavier, more expensive f/2.8 IS over the f/4 IS, it's because I need the speed, not so I can stop it down to be sharp.

Keep the bull****.

If you need 2.8, then you don't even need to compare sharpness with a f/4 lens. You just buy the 2.8 and be happy.

But given the original question, the OP does not always need 2.8.
In this case, he has the option to stop the 2.8 IS down to f/4 without worrying about IQ.
It will in fact be almost identical to the 4 IS.
But peepers and fanboys will disagree :)


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnny_boy
Member
75 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Pacific NW, USA
     
Sep 09, 2010 18:55 |  #73

tancanon58 wrote in post #10880873 (external link)
Wow, f4 IS is an IQ monger huh? Now I know which one to get..

Yep, f4 versions are fantastic! I don't own one, but I borrowed/rented many times before I settled for a 2.8.

f4s are not the lesser brothers, but I would call them equal to 2.8s. It somewhat makes sense as both f4 versions have fluorite elements in it, while only the 2.8 IS II version has fluorite element.

As mentioned ealier defintely pick any Canon 70-200mm based on speed, IS support and budget, rather than purely IQ. They are similar enough in IQ that it won't matter to most people at typical viewing sizes.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,831 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Sep 09, 2010 19:44 |  #74

CheshireCat wrote in post #10881089 (external link)
If you need 2.8, then you don't even need to compare sharpness with a f/4 lens. You just buy the 2.8 and be happy.

Be happy or live with it?

CheshireCat wrote in post #10881089 (external link)
In this case, he has the option to stop the 2.8 IS down to f/4 without worrying about IQ.

And when you have to use it wide open?

CheshireCat wrote in post #10881089 (external link)
It will in fact be almost identical to the 4 IS.

But still not quite as good until about f/5.6.

CheshireCat wrote in post #10881089 (external link)
But peepers and fanboys will disagree :)

I don't even know what this means.

Either way, I can just speak from experience. When I had my old 70-200 f/2.8 IS, it wasn't great at f/2.8 so I always used it at f/3.5 and up. If I needed more speed than that, I used a faster lens. So I thought it was stupid to have this big, heavy, expensive lens when I could upgrade to a 70-200 f/4 IS that is smaller, lighter, cheaper, that I have zero hesitation to use wide open. It's a fantastic lens. When Canon updated the f/2.8 IS, I jumped on it, and it's another lens that I have zero hesitation to use wide open - just like an expensive pro lens should be.

Typically when people are comparing lens sharpeness, they're looking to compare them wide open. If we're going to stop one down and not the other, it's not really fair. If we're going to compare all lenses at f/8, then it's really not going to matter when you buy.


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Sep 09, 2010 21:34 |  #75

timnosenzo wrote in post #10881355 (external link)
When I had my old 70-200 f/2.8 IS, it wasn't great at f/2.8 so I always used it at f/3.5 and up.

Tim, you probably had a bad copy.
Mine is great at f/2.8 (I use it 90% wide open) even at 200mm, especially in the center.

The only reason for me to upgrade to the 2.8 II would be the improved IS and the IQ with extenders.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

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

10,349 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 70-200 order of sharpness?
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 Rakeem
1033 guests, 215 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.