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 04 Jun 2013 (Tuesday) 12:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 F2.8, is it really that soft when wide open on a crop body?

 
sawsedge
Senior Member
Avatar
816 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Dec 2011
Location: United States
     
Jul 03, 2013 13:09 |  #46

w0m wrote in post #16042433 (external link)
I have actually heard that the 100-400 was a poor choice to use on an APS-C camera; but had not heard that about any of the 70-200's until now.

Sample variation, missed focus, camera shake, etc, probably account for most of this. There are way too many sharp samples from these "older" lenses like the 100-400 and 70-200 f/2.8L IS mk1 to say they are soft. That cheetah pic above is a solid example of that.

OTOH, every time my friend shows me results from his 70-200 mkII, I go "WOW!" because it is clearly much improved over my mk1.

When I compared my mk1 vs a nice prime like my 300 f/4, of course the prime is better, but the zoom is still a solid performer.


- John

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jul 03, 2013 14:08 |  #47

I bought a used 70-200 f2.8 is yesterday for my t3i. the only lens Ive used before is the 18-135 (not STM).
I don't know if the 18-135 has amazing image quality, or that the 70-200's sucks. Honestly, I can't relate to the mark ii 70-200 but I don't think image quality can get any better. I do find my 70-200 2.8 IS to be soft around 2.8, but not the kind of softnessthat will make you close the aperture to f5.6.
Yes, it is sharper when stopped down 2 stops. Can I notice the difference? Not unless Im pixel-peeping in 100% crops on my monitor.
The wheigt of this lens really is something to consider. I thought I can handle it with ease but it really is REALLY HEAVY AND BIG.
AF wise - abit better than my 18-135's af - faster than my eye. the big improvement is that I can manual focus during af and that the af motor is silent.
I haven't notice any vignnieting/color fringing.
IS is pretty noticeable - you can hear it aswell as feel it.
the bokeh is somewhat harsh compared to what ive seen from samples of the mark ii here on potn..
All of the other things - contrast, color rendition, saturation - are really well on this lens.
Ive got mine with the original packge and acc. as well as a B+W filter - all for an amzing price of 900$!
the reason for this is that I got it from a family friend. If you get a good deal on this lens I say jump for it.
I hope I helped you make a decision.


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 288
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jul 03, 2013 14:42 |  #48

Romax12 wrote in post #16088096 (external link)
I bought a used 70-200 f2.8 is yesterday for my t3i. the only lens Ive used before is the 18-135 (not STM).
I don't know if the 18-135 has amazing image quality, or that the 70-200's sucks. Honestly, I can't relate to the mark ii 70-200 but I don't think image quality can get any better. I do find my 70-200 2.8 IS to be soft around 2.8, but not the kind of softnessthat will make you close the aperture to f5.6.
Yes, it is sharper when stopped down 2 stops. Can I notice the difference? Not unless Im pixel-peeping in 100% crops on my monitor.
The wheigt of this lens really is something to consider. I thought I can handle it with ease but it really is REALLY HEAVY AND BIG.
AF wise - abit better than my 18-135's af - faster than my eye. the big improvement is that I can manual focus during af and that the af motor is silent.
I haven't notice any vignnieting/color fringing.
IS is pretty noticeable - you can hear it aswell as feel it.
the bokeh is somewhat harsh compared to what ive seen from samples of the mark ii here on potn..
All of the other things - contrast, color rendition, saturation - are really well on this lens.
Ive got mine with the original packge and acc. as well as a B+W filter - all for an amzing price of 900$!
the reason for this is that I got it from a family friend. If you get a good deal on this lens I say jump for it.
I hope I helped you make a decision.

Can you post some image samples at 200mm @ f/2.8, subject about 2 meters away? Something like a stick in the lawn, shot from seated or laying down (shooting on elbows) would be great, so we could see the focal plane in the grass blades. High shutter speed (over 1/1000).

I discovered that my non-IS got a LOT sharper when I went from my T2i to my 1D3. Then I started wondering why, and I realized that my T2i was missing focus just about all the time. I had never noticed before b/c this was just part of my progression as a photographer -- blaming everything but my focus for the softness. I thought I was nailing it b/c I'd never seen anything better with my own equipment.

I'm not saying you are incorrect about the IQ of your copy, but there is a chance that the narrow DoF is too much for your T3i's AF. I was able to circle back to my T2i and get some great focus with the 70-200 f/2.8L, but my technique had to improve. It still misses a LOT in sports, compared to my 1D3.


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jul 03, 2013 15:03 |  #49

waterrockets wrote in post #16088196 (external link)
Can you post some image samples at 200mm @ f/2.8, subject about 2 meters away? Something like a stick in the lawn, shot from seated or laying down (shooting on elbows) would be great, so we could see the focal plane in the grass blades. High shutter speed (over 1/1000).

I discovered that my non-IS got a LOT sharper when I went from my T2i to my 1D3. Then I started wondering why, and I realized that my T2i was missing focus just about all the time. I had never noticed before b/c this was just part of my progression as a photographer -- blaming everything but my focus for the softness. I thought I was nailing it b/c I'd never seen anything better with my own equipment.

I'm not saying you are incorrect about the IQ of your copy, but there is a chance that the narrow DoF is too much for your T3i's AF. I was able to circle back to my T2i and get some great focus with the 70-200 f/2.8L, but my technique had to improve. It still misses a LOT in sports, compared to my 1D3.

I will post some pics here tommorow, my battery is dead right now :cry:
at first ive noticed some softness even on the view finder, but then I discovered that someone has been playing with the little +- wheel near the viewfinder. Im not saying that the image quality sucks - im just saying that 70-200 f2.8 IS at 135mm 2.8 looks similar to what I see on the 18-135 IS @135 f5.6.
If I will find focusing issues, is there any chance to correct it with my rebel?


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 288
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jul 03, 2013 15:24 |  #50

My T2i issues were that I was firing before the AI Servo fully figured out what was going on, so it seems I can do better by giving the camera more time tracking my subject before I fire. I've found it's fully capable of perfect focus, I was just rushing it, and I wasn't missing it by much...

Here's a T2i shot -- focused a bit behind her goggles from what I can see in the swim cap (click for full size)

IMAGE: http://waterrockets.smugmug.com/Sports/Swimming/Seals-Action-Photos-May-30/i-DJWwgqK/2/XL/IMG_2688-XL.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://waterrockets.sm​ugmug.com …-DJWwgqK/2/O/IMG_2688.j​pg  (external link)

And here's a 1D3 shot a year later... (click for full size)
IMAGE: http://waterrockets.smugmug.com/Sports/Swimming/Seals-Action-Photos-2013/i-Wzrd8Q7/0/XL/IMG_0744-XL.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://waterrockets.sm​ugmug.com …-Wzrd8Q7/0/O/IMG_0744.j​pg  (external link)

1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jul 03, 2013 15:39 |  #51

if im letting the camera choose an af point, it probably won't be spot on my subject, but if im shooting, lets say, a fast bird, the center af point would not be on the subject 100% of the time. I know my camera limits and im not expecting the af to perform like those uesd in the pro bodies... what you said about giving the camera time to focus - isn't the camera continue focusing while taking burst (in ai-servo ofcourse)? outdoors af is AMAZINGLY fast and if not getting a sharp photo from ai servo is the case then its probably the mfa which unfortunately I can't control with my t3i...
I will take some shots from both lenses on manual focus tommorow.


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 288
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jul 03, 2013 16:27 |  #52

All with center point AF, and for swimming I don't have AF Expansion on the 1D.

For me, it was that each swimmer is only out of the water in a fly stroke for less than a second. So, focused on the waves from when they went under water, to their goggle nose bridge when they come up, then squeezing off a shot is just a low percentage shot with a Rebel -- there's water spray to deal with, and then they are back under water. I had kids taking 4 lengths before I felt comfortable with the shots I had of them. With the 1D, I've got all the keepers I need in the first three strokes, and they're focused even better than the T2i keepers.

Even in soccer though, I think the bouncing from running was changing the focal target as I panned along with them, and it never quite got to where it needed to be.

That said, I do indeed have a small amount of MFA (-2) on my 1D3 for this lens. With a still subject on my T2i though, I could get great focus.


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jul 04, 2013 09:24 |  #53

waterrockets wrote in post #16088510 (external link)
All with center point AF, and for swimming I don't have AF Expansion on the 1D.

For me, it was that each swimmer is only out of the water in a fly stroke for less than a second. So, focused on the waves from when they went under water, to their goggle nose bridge when they come up, then squeezing off a shot is just a low percentage shot with a Rebel -- there's water spray to deal with, and then they are back under water. I had kids taking 4 lengths before I felt comfortable with the shots I had of them. With the 1D, I've got all the keepers I need in the first three strokes, and they're focused even better than the T2i keepers.

Even in soccer though, I think the bouncing from running was changing the focal target as I panned along with them, and it never quite got to where it needed to be.

That said, I do indeed have a small amount of MFA (-2) on my 1D3 for this lens. With a still subject on my T2i though, I could get great focus.

here you go, not grass cause im in my house so I took two shots from 3-5 meters @200mm f2.8 1/1000th iso 100.
shot in raw and converted to jpeg in lightroom:

1.

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

IMG_5880 (external link) by Alonsegel (external link), on Flickr
2.
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMG_5879 (external link) by Alonsegel (external link), on Flickr

Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 288
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jul 04, 2013 13:25 |  #54

1 is tough to tell since so much of the hose is in focus, but I think it nabbed the pebbles under the hose, which is fine.

In 2, I think you nailed focus, looking at full size, on the grout just closer than the black spec under the hose. Looks like focus right on the hose surface above the grout line.

In general, I think you are in business with these. Normal sharpening, and IQ should be dandy. Do you think there's a problem with them?


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jul 04, 2013 14:09 |  #55

waterrockets wrote in post #16091148 (external link)
1 is tough to tell since so much of the hose is in focus, but I think it nabbed the pebbles under the hose, which is fine.

In 2, I think you nailed focus, looking at full size, on the grout just closer than the black spec under the hose. Looks like focus right on the hose surface above the grout line.

In general, I think you are in business with these. Normal sharpening, and IQ should be dandy. Do you think there's a problem with them?

I don't, but I can't compare to anything as I said in my first post. Do you think my copy is good?


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 288
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jul 04, 2013 22:37 |  #56

Can't see any issues in those shots, but it's kind of a low contrast subject. Something like a stick or a rock in a lawn is a pretty reasonable test in full sun, because it's clear what you're focusing on, and the grass will tell you exactly where the focal plane is.


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mrjeans
Member
149 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Feb 2011
     
Jul 05, 2013 03:03 |  #57

Welcome to the 'L' world!...

As the wise man said.. it is a bit softer for tests...but it will be perfectly alright for the clients. I don't think it is so soft that your clients will notice.

Free advice : Why don't you try some rental first?..you can judge it by yourself and then make a call.


Canon 5D MK iii &7D,
85 f/1.2L Mkii,
50 f/1.2L,
35mm 1.4 DG HSM,
70-200 L f/2.8 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jul 05, 2013 05:40 |  #58

The cheapo Tamron 70-200 (non VC) is sharper than the IS MKI for sure. In fact it's very close to the 70-200 IS II, even at 200mm just stop down 1/3 stop to f/3.2 it's comparable to the MK II at f/2.8. I own/owned both and I don't hesitate at all to shoot with the Tamron instead of MK II when I don't need IS. In comparison the MK I at 200mm wide open is average.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben805
Goldmember
1,197 posts
Likes: 97
Joined Mar 2007
     
Jul 05, 2013 21:27 as a reply to  @ genjurok's post |  #59

Had the version 1 70-200 2.8 IS back when I had the 30D, that lens sucks bad...got the hazy look and very low contract wide open, no better than the kit lens 18-55 IS. only used it from f/4.0 and up, worst lens I ever had.


5D Mark III, Samyang 14mm, 35LII, 85L II, 100L IS Macro, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II. 580EX, AB400, AB800.

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

7,756 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 F2.8, is it really that soft when wide open on a crop body?
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 AstroNate
1351 guests, 245 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.