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 09 Jun 2009 (Tuesday) 00:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

how is the canon 70-200mm image quality vs primes?

 
dc5itr888
Member
214 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Jun 09, 2009 00:54 |  #1

Reason I ask is because I just rented the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS and after a hour of playing with it...I honestly cant see a difference between that compared to my 50mm F1.4 Prime


Canon 5d with 24-105mm and a Canon 28-135mm which stays in the bag all the time. Canon 50mm F1.4 PRIME
Canon 400d with Canon 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 (wannabe L lens), 18-55 EL Cheapo lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Burnaby
Senior Member
Avatar
345 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver, Canada
     
Jun 09, 2009 01:06 |  #2

Sometimes perception is more important than reality...

If you can't see the difference, then you're a lucky man indeed...

It won't cost you an arm and a leg like it does me...



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Medic1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,308 posts
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Ontario, Canada
     
Jun 09, 2009 01:08 |  #3

I really don't know how to answer this one. I guess its just preference...if you think the 50 1.4 is just as good then thats good news for you. I think the 50 is a great piece of glass, don't get me wrong but I would take a 70-200 2.8 IS over it any day. In fact I just sold my 50 1.4 to fund my purchase of "the brick". Glad I did, my copy is super sharp...sharper than my 50 ever was.

I loved my 50mm 1.4 but didn't get enough use out of it. Definetly not as much as I will get out of the 70-200/24-70 combo.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon ­ Bob
Goldmember
2,063 posts
Likes: 52
Joined May 2007
Location: Poitou-Charentes, France
     
Jun 09, 2009 01:10 as a reply to  @ Burnaby's post |  #4

Either your 50/1.4 is soft or my 70-200/2.8 IS is soft...I guess we'll never know which ;).

Bob


1Dx2 (2), 5DSR, 1Ds3, 1D4, 5D2(590nm), 5D2(720nm) EF600 EF400 EF300-II EF300 EF200 EF200-II EF180L EF135L EF100 EF85-II EF50L TS-E17/4 TS-E24L-II TS-E45 TS-E90 MP-E65 EF70-200-II EF24-70/2.8-II EF16-35/4 EF8-15/4 EF11-24/4 Zeiss 15/2.8 21/2.8 25/2 28/2 35/1.4 35/2 50/2 85/1.4 100/2 135/2 T/C's L-SC & a WIFE!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john-in-japan
Goldmember
1,208 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2008
Location: Kamogawa City, Chiba in Japan
     
Jun 09, 2009 01:12 |  #5

The major difference is sharp at 70-200mm.


JohnW
5D Mark II Dual Battery Grip, [COLOR=black], 200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L II IS, 24-70 f/2.8L 180Macro f/3.5L[COLOR=black], 85 II f/1.2L[COLOR=black], 17-40 f/4L, 50 f/1.4, 50 f/2.5 Compact Macro, MPE-65, 550EX, 400L f.2.8L IS, 580EXII, Canon RingFlash, RRS Perfect Portrait Pkg., Velbon with PH275 and Slider, bunch of filters, Canon 1.4X & Having Fun! http://kamogawa.smugmu​g.com/external link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dc5itr888
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
214 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Jun 09, 2009 01:19 |  #6

i guess i will test it in the day time 2morow...ive only taken night shots


Canon 5d with 24-105mm and a Canon 28-135mm which stays in the bag all the time. Canon 50mm F1.4 PRIME
Canon 400d with Canon 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 (wannabe L lens), 18-55 EL Cheapo lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,381 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3281
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jun 09, 2009 01:38 |  #7

i would think the prime would be sharper than the zoom...i think that's where you should see a difference...i would think that no matter how good the zoom is, the prime would have the upper hand


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dc5itr888
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
214 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Jun 09, 2009 03:12 |  #8

thats what i thought to believe...but read numerous threads here and on FM that the image quality on the canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS is so great that its A LOT better than regular NON L primes such as the 50mm f1.4


Canon 5d with 24-105mm and a Canon 28-135mm which stays in the bag all the time. Canon 50mm F1.4 PRIME
Canon 400d with Canon 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 (wannabe L lens), 18-55 EL Cheapo lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Vermin87
Goldmember
1,036 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Location: CA
     
Jun 09, 2009 03:24 |  #9

Well your focal length makes a huge difference in a lot of things:
1) Distortion - 50mm is considered pretty neutral, beyond that, it actually creates a "slimming" effect. Hence, 70-200 is very popular for portraits.
2) Bokeh quality - I don't know exactly all that is behind this, but I know that at 200mm, the bokeh is buttery smooth compared to the bokeh when stepped up closer to the subject and shot at 50mm

Also, the quality of construction is one HUGE advantage to the 70-200. Weather sealing, number of aperture blades, curvature of the aperture blades. Shoot some christmas lights at night and you'll notice the difference in aperture blades.

As everyone else mentioned though, ultimately, it is up to you to decide what best suits your needs.


Gear
Flickr (external link)
Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,317 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 532
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jun 09, 2009 03:29 |  #10

dc5itr888 wrote in post #8076097 (external link)
thats what i thought to believe...but read numerous threads here and on FM that the image quality on the canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS is so great that its A LOT better than regular NON L primes such as the 50mm f1.4

no way it's alot better but the two lenses should be very close... probably starting at about f4 or so. at f2.8 i'd expect the prime to be noticeably sharper.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
martinsmith
Senior Member
Avatar
680 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: S Glos, UK
     
Jun 09, 2009 09:13 |  #11

Vermin87 wrote in post #8076130 (external link)
Well your focal length makes a huge difference in a lot of things:
1) Distortion - 50mm is considered pretty neutral, beyond that, it actually creates a "slimming" effect. Hence, 70-200 is very popular for portraits.

Focal length does not cause it, but distance from subject may.:rolleyes:


[SIZE=1]ms-imaging (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sonnyc
Cream of the Crop
5,160 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2005
Location: san jose
     
Jun 09, 2009 09:34 |  #12

My 50 f1.4 kicks both my 70-200 IS and non-IS anytime. The prime is MUCH sharper.

However, people bought the 70-200 for many many other reasons beside sharpness (which I think is insanely overrated on forums). If you need 70-200 range, there's no substitute for the 70-200 f2.8 IS. It's THE lens in Canon's line up.


Sonny
website (external link)|Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,163 posts
Gallery: 192 photos
Likes: 9037
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jun 09, 2009 10:02 |  #13

martinsmith wrote in post #8076920 (external link)
Focal length does not cause it, but distance from subject may.:rolleyes:

This sounds like your thinking of perspective?, in which case you'd be 100% correct, but he seems to be talking about distortion

1) Distortion - 50mm is considered pretty neutral, beyond that, it actually creates a "slimming" effect. Hence, 70-200 is very popular for portraits.

..... which is certainly effected by optical design including FL.. as opposed to only subject distance.

You might consider refraining from the roll eyes smily when offering a correction too, it can make all the difference between being helpful and, well ,. not.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
44,274 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3468
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Jun 09, 2009 10:43 |  #14

Primes don't always beat zooms, as was true 40 years ago before computer-aided lens design become commonplace! Sometimes the zooms are equal or better than the prime.

In the case of 50mm f/1.4 and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, the tests on photozone.de show very comparable MTF values. At f/4 both lenses have MTF value in the Center which is within 3%...small enough that you might attibute it simply to sample-to-sample variation in performance! But that rating is at the best FL for the zoom, which happened to be 135mm in the sample tested.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ajc518
Member
80 posts
Joined May 2009
     
Jun 09, 2009 10:51 |  #15

dc5itr888 wrote in post #8075620 (external link)
Reason I ask is because I just rented the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS and after a hour of playing with it...I honestly cant see a difference between that compared to my 50mm F1.4 Prime

You couldnt see the 20mm difference between 50mm to 70mm???
:lol: just joking

It's an on going argument that prime lenses will be sharper or not. The main thing is that you can go 70mm to 200mm with just turning your wrist. To get the same with the prime, you actually have to walk closer. Which in a lot of situations, that isnt an option.

The best overall would be to have the prime for portraits, or up close things. The zoom will always be better for sports, and events.

I have the 50mm prime f/1.8, and the 70-200 f/4. So I cant really help much more on the two exact ones you are talking about.


Canon 7D, Canon XT, Canon Elan 7, Canon 24-105mm L, Canon 100-400mm L, [/SIZE]

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

3,662 views & 0 likes for this thread
how is the canon 70-200mm image quality vs primes?
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 was a spammer, and banned as such!
781 guests, 180 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.