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 28 Oct 2009 (Wednesday) 19:04
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Am i being fussy? 70-200 2.8 IS

 
DBJ
Senior Member
326 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Oct 29, 2009 17:02 |  #31

samueli wrote in post #8920009 (external link)
I just got a 70-200 f/28 IS, and have been b***ing and whining, and shooting test charts evenings at time. I finally got out and did about 600 real world shots, and while I have more than my share of camera shake and such, the shots that are spot on are almost blow me away quality - and I was shooting at 3200 ISO the whole day on a 50D! If you really think you can use the lens, get it and give it some time. Once you get in the groove, it gets much better.

I'm guilty of that with the 24-70L, i should have kept it.


7D | 500D | 350D || 11-16mm 2.8 | 15-85mm IS | 17-55mm 2.8 IS | 24-70mm 2.8L | 24-105mm 4L IS | 70-200mm 2.8L | 70-200mm 4L IS | 30mm 1.4 | 50mm 1.4 | 85mm 1.8 | 135mm 2L || 18-55mm | 18-55mm IS | 100-300mm | 50mm 1.4 nikkor | 50mm 2.5 || 580EX II | 430EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
AMD87
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
147 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Hamilton
     
Oct 29, 2009 17:04 |  #32

bluefox9er wrote in post #8919887 (external link)
try opening to f4 or f5.6..also your shutter speeds are way to slow...but if it is soft, get a refund immedeatly

GilesGuthrie wrote in post #8919911 (external link)
Yep, almost all of those in the Doune gallery were taken with it. The thing is, when you're shooting pans, you're stopped down anyway. I rarely shoot more open than F/8 when panning.

Thats the thing though if im going to have to stop down to make the lense sharp is there much point in having the 2.8 over the 4 if the 2.8 isnt going to be sharp til f4> then for me it sory of defeats the purpose pf having the 2.8 when i can have the 4 then use a 50 1.4/85 1.8 or a 28 1.8 from the money ive saved over getting the 2.8.

Sorry, i didn't know you could view in detail. On closer look, i guess there really isn't that sharp of an area in each photo.

The first seems to be from camera shake, tough to conclude much.

The second, the sign post seems to be the sharpest. Looks like the focus point is in front of the objects in the shot, possibly in front of the sign.

The third, the crop of the left bottom corner shows the focus point is in front of this area of the pavement.

For the second and third, there seems to be signficant front focus, could be lens, camera, or just from missing focus. The photos do not seem conclusive in determining sharpness. If these photos were a true indicator of sharpness, i would be disappointed though.

i did look at those areas and they were sharp but again not as sharp as i hoped but then again could have been due to camera sharp but IS was on which should have helped?


Andrew
Canon 450D, Canon 7D Gripped
Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon EF-S 55-250 IS , Sigma 70-300mm, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, Canon 50mm 1.4, Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II VC
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,256 posts
Likes: 86
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Oct 29, 2009 17:09 |  #33

Do you have a "protection" filter on the lens?

Do you pause half a second before taking the shot to allow IS time to do it's job? This is part of the learning curve with IS lenses. You can usually see IS responding to movement in the viewfinder, and should wait until it sort of snaps into place.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DBJ
Senior Member
326 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Oct 29, 2009 17:11 |  #34

AMD87 wrote in post #8920090 (external link)
i did look at those areas and they were sharp but again not as sharp as i hoped but then again could have been due to camera sharp but IS was on which should have helped?

I think these photos show a lot of front focus, focus points seem to lie outside the picture. Could be camera, lens, user error, or just plain missing the focus.

The objects at the front most edges are sharpest but even they are not that sharp. You would need to focus on something so that you can see the areas behind and in front of the focus point in one shot.

IS helps sharpness, but if the focus point is not present in the frame, everything else is stabilized, but out of focus. IS would not help with the car because it does not stop motion. It would keep you steady but the car is still moving. 1/400 may not be fast enough.


7D | 500D | 350D || 11-16mm 2.8 | 15-85mm IS | 17-55mm 2.8 IS | 24-70mm 2.8L | 24-105mm 4L IS | 70-200mm 2.8L | 70-200mm 4L IS | 30mm 1.4 | 50mm 1.4 | 85mm 1.8 | 135mm 2L || 18-55mm | 18-55mm IS | 100-300mm | 50mm 1.4 nikkor | 50mm 2.5 || 580EX II | 430EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AMD87
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
147 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Hamilton
     
Oct 29, 2009 17:39 |  #35

amfoto1 wrote in post #8920120 (external link)
Do you have a "protection" filter on the lens?

Do you pause half a second before taking the shot to allow IS time to do it's job? This is part of the learning curve with IS lenses. You can usually see IS responding to movement in the viewfinder, and should wait until it sort of snaps into place.

No filter on the lense and yes i did wait half a second or so.

DBJ wrote in post #8920131 (external link)
I think these photos show a lot of front focus, focus points seem to lie outside the picture. Could be camera, lens, user error, or just plain missing the focus.

The objects at the front most edges are sharpest but even they are not that sharp. You would need to focus on something so that you can see the areas behind and in front of the focus point in one shot.

IS helps sharpness, but if the focus point is not present in the frame, everything else is stabilized, but out of focus. IS would not help with the car because it does not stop motion. It would keep you steady but the car is still moving. 1/400 may not be fast enough.

The BMW shot was using AI Servo AF may be the issue there? It not keeping up?


Andrew
Canon 450D, Canon 7D Gripped
Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon EF-S 55-250 IS , Sigma 70-300mm, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, Canon 50mm 1.4, Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II VC
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1234sakura
Member
46 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Oct 29, 2009 21:36 as a reply to  @ AMD87's post |  #36
bannedPermanent ban

Thats the thing though if im going to have to stop down to make the lense sharp is there much point in having the 2.8 over the 4 if the 2.8 isnt going to be sharp til f4> then for me it sory of defeats the purpose pf having the 2.8 when i can have the 4 then use a 50 1.4/85 1.8 or a 28 1.8 from the money ive saved over getting the 2.8.

Any thoughts on this?... anyone?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DBJ
Senior Member
326 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Oct 29, 2009 22:02 |  #37

AMD87 wrote in post #8920279 (external link)
The BMW shot was using AI Servo AF may be the issue there? It not keeping up?

Could be, there are lots of other variables also.

1234sakura wrote in post #8921512 (external link)
Any thoughts on this?... anyone?

Well it's up to you to decide if the extra money and f/2.8 is worth it. From the samples i've seen, the 70-200mm's are all good, if not great, wide open.

Every lens will be less sharp and have other defects wide open, it's unreasonable to expect a zoom lens to have maximum sharpness wide open. Some lenses are better than others, like the 70-200mm f/4L IS. The f/2.8 IS is sharp wide open, sharper stopped down, i don't see any problems with this. It's just a matter if you want to pay extra for it.

The pictures in this thread are not indicative of the sharpness at f/2.8, so i would not judge by these pictures.


7D | 500D | 350D || 11-16mm 2.8 | 15-85mm IS | 17-55mm 2.8 IS | 24-70mm 2.8L | 24-105mm 4L IS | 70-200mm 2.8L | 70-200mm 4L IS | 30mm 1.4 | 50mm 1.4 | 85mm 1.8 | 135mm 2L || 18-55mm | 18-55mm IS | 100-300mm | 50mm 1.4 nikkor | 50mm 2.5 || 580EX II | 430EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ROMEO.XK
Member
228 posts
Joined Jun 2009
     
Oct 30, 2009 01:25 |  #38

Why is it that every time I make up my mind on changing my 70-200 F/4 IS for the F/2.8 (Since I'm still with in the time to where the store will take it back since its only been 5 days) there is a new tread of someone not been happy with theirs??? I was set on going to the store on the morning, and now this...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ROMEO.XK
Member
228 posts
Joined Jun 2009
     
Oct 30, 2009 01:47 |  #39

AMD87 wrote in post #8914015 (external link)
I know there are about 5 billion 70-200 threads so heres mine :lol:

I always promised my self that when i got my first "proper" job i would treat myself to an L-series lens so popped into jessops today and they had a 70-200 2.8 IS which is near the top of my short list if not the top. Although on trying it out i have to say i am slightly disappointed i was expecting it to be alot sharper (im a right PIA for sharpness).

Also i mainly do Motorsport with some street/landscape and candid at friends partys or just having a laugh.....anything really :lol: i also like doing night time as well.

The thing is with night time i use a tripod and a low apeture anyway so what i'm thinking is is that do i really need the 2.8 over the 4 where as if i get the 4 IS i can cover most and for the candid parties etc i would still have change to get the 50 1.4 and with abit more the 85 1.8 too. i know im about to open a large can of worms but lucky a know a couple of people who have a photography studio and a 70-200 2.8 IS and told me im more than welcome to come to the studio and try it out properly for longer so i'm also hoping for some advice on how to use it properly to get the most to see if it is what i want.

All taken at 2.8....


A few things to keep on mind, you can use a 70-200 F/2.8 at F/2.8, F/4, or what ever, but you can't use a 70-200 F/4 at F2.8. From what some people say here, the 70-200 F/4 get sharper when step down, so you would still at the same spot, steeping down to F5.6, or 8, so you might no be happy with it then... If the picture is not as sharp as you want it to be, there is always post processing.

You also say that you have print some of your pics at full size, but I would guess that you don't look at the print 2 feet away.

The point of the F/2.8 been sharper than the F/4 seem to be something that people are 50-50 on, some say that yes, one is sharper over the other, some say that there is no way, have you taken a look at the tread on this forum with pics from this lens? There is a ton of sweet pics there, just like there are some nice pics that came from the F/4.

I have spend 4 days, and a big part of the nights, as I don't sleep much reading reviews, checking out different web sites, and one thing is for sure, every one agrees that the F/2.8 IS is a great lens for sure, it seems like you can do more with this lens than with the F/4 IS, now, it comes at a price tag, and with extra weight...

One thing is for sure, it seems like most people have a very hard time choosing between the 70-200 F/2.8 and the 70-200 F/4 IS or not, depending on the budget... Me included... But I think I will go for it... Oh, and just for the record, I'm a noob when it comes to photography... BUt I Have spent a lot of time researching this lens...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AMD87
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
147 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Hamilton
     
Oct 30, 2009 10:06 |  #40

ROMEO.XK wrote in post #8922610 (external link)
A few things to keep on mind, you can use a 70-200 F/2.8 at F/2.8, F/4, or what ever, but you can't use a 70-200 F/4 at F2.8. From what some people say here, the 70-200 F/4 get sharper when step down, so you would still at the same spot, steeping down to F5.6, or 8, so you might no be happy with it then... If the picture is not as sharp as you want it to be, there is always post processing.

You also say that you have print some of your pics at full size, but I would guess that you don't look at the print 2 feet away.

The point of the F/2.8 been sharper than the F/4 seem to be something that people are 50-50 on, some say that yes, one is sharper over the other, some say that there is no way, have you taken a look at the tread on this forum with pics from this lens? There is a ton of sweet pics there, just like there are some nice pics that came from the F/4.

I have spend 4 days, and a big part of the nights, as I don't sleep much reading reviews, checking out different web sites, and one thing is for sure, every one agrees that the F/2.8 IS is a great lens for sure, it seems like you can do more with this lens than with the F/4 IS, now, it comes at a price tag, and with extra weight...

One thing is for sure, it seems like most people have a very hard time choosing between the 70-200 F/2.8 and the 70-200 F/4 IS or not, depending on the budget... Me included... But I think I will go for it... Oh, and just for the record, I'm a noob when it comes to photography... BUt I Have spent a lot of time researching this lens...

Trust me i've looked at loads of reviews and in the lens archive which is one of the reasons why i would love this lense but the majority of those pictures are took by superior cameras which can handle noise better and also no doubt those people know how to take better pictures than me too :lol:.

True i might not look at it from 2 feet away but every time i have a new one up the first thing people do is go right up and look at it.

I almost feel as if i'm talking myself out of getting this lense every time i write up a post. The 2.8 would be great but if im stopping down to 4,5.6,8 etc on the 2.8 to get a sharp image is there an advantage having it over the 4 and spending the rest on a 50 1.4/28 1.8/85 1.8 which would give me the sharper image in low light.

If anyone has it along with a 450d it would be good to see their pictures from it at 2.8


Andrew
Canon 450D, Canon 7D Gripped
Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon EF-S 55-250 IS , Sigma 70-300mm, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, Canon 50mm 1.4, Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II VC
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BenJohnson
Goldmember
Avatar
1,811 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Minneapolis, MN
     
Oct 30, 2009 10:16 |  #41

AMD87 wrote in post #8924018 (external link)
If anyone has it along with a 450d it would be good to see their pictures from it at 2.8

Here's some I took with a 400D and 70-200 2.8, all are wide open:

https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=7816447#p​ost7816447


|Ben Johnson Photography (external link)|
|Gear List|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bluefox9er
Goldmember
Avatar
1,706 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: UK,don't move ehre,it rains a lot, it's incredibly violent and the women pee standing up..
     
Oct 30, 2009 10:41 |  #42

amfoto1 wrote in post #8919327 (external link)
Here's what's wrong with your lens... The person standing behind it. ;)

You need to stop staring at 100% images on your computer.... you'll probably never print them anywhere near that large and your monitor is not likely to show all the detail that's actually there.

Go shoot pictures. Enjoy.

so by that mentality, it's no big deal if you get a sub performing copy???

and how can you blame the photographer? do you know the Op's style ad skills? hes posted copies of images from a lens that *clearly* stinks and youre blaming him!! unbelievbable!!!


http://www.flickr.com …s/sets/72157602​470636767/ (external link)
http://www.flickr.com …ctions/72157604​292148339/ (external link)
Canon EOS 1d mk III, Canon EOS 5d,Canon EOS 400d, 24-70 mm F2.8 L, ef 24-105 F4 L IS, ef 17-40 mm F4 L, 70-200 mm f2.8 IS L, 100-400 mm IS L, 50mmm f1.8, 85mmf1.8mm, ef 35 mm f1.4L, ef 135 mm f2 L,Canon Powershot G9, Epson p400-, hyperdrive space 120gb

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DBJ
Senior Member
326 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Oct 30, 2009 13:54 |  #43

AMD87 wrote in post #8924018 (external link)
I almost feel as if i'm talking myself out of getting this lense every time i write up a post. The 2.8 would be great but if im stopping down to 4,5.6,8 etc on the 2.8 to get a sharp image is there an advantage having it over the 4 and spending the rest on a 50 1.4/28 1.8/85 1.8 which would give me the sharper image in low light.

It is sharp at f/2.8 period. It's not as good as the 70-200mm f/4 IS wide open, but it's still very sharp. It's sharp wide open, and even sharper stopped down. We're not talking about cheap variable-aperture zooms here, this lens is proven to be good wide open.

Yes, the primes will give you sharper images at f/2.8.

Your copy may have been softer than usual or broken, but based on the above pictures, it seems like user error.

bluefox9er wrote in post #8924171 (external link)
so by that mentality, it's no big deal if you get a sub performing copy

and how can you blame the photographer? do you know the Op's style ad skills? hes posted copies of images from a lens that *clearly* stinks and youre blaming him!! unbelievbable!!!


It's not ok to get a bad copy, but you can't conclude this lens is bad simply from these examples.

No one's blaming, the pictures do suck, and you can't tell if it was the lens, the camera, or the user. The pictures weren't taken in the best way to evaluate sharpness, so there is significant room for user error.


7D | 500D | 350D || 11-16mm 2.8 | 15-85mm IS | 17-55mm 2.8 IS | 24-70mm 2.8L | 24-105mm 4L IS | 70-200mm 2.8L | 70-200mm 4L IS | 30mm 1.4 | 50mm 1.4 | 85mm 1.8 | 135mm 2L || 18-55mm | 18-55mm IS | 100-300mm | 50mm 1.4 nikkor | 50mm 2.5 || 580EX II | 430EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 406
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Oct 30, 2009 16:44 as a reply to  @ DBJ's post |  #44

Center crops should be sharper than the OP's sample.
The lens seems front-focusing.

Once you stop it at f/3.5, properly focused center crops are not distinguishable from the Leica Telyt-R 180 which is one of the sharpest primes:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=744260

Border crops are a different story though.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  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
     
Oct 30, 2009 17:00 |  #45

AMD87 wrote in post #8914252 (external link)
So i suppose the answer is yes to me being fussy :lol:

No sharpening at all,as they are from the camera and the camera is still on stock settings.

I mainly use apeture priority so if my shutter speed gets low i just start stopping down but again if it is a case of using f8 then is it just better to get the f4 and then getting a 50 f1.4.

Yes it is centre focus.

It is alot of money to put into a lense if im not gonna be happy with it :(

you could always stop down to, say, f3.5 which will probably be almost as sharp as the 70-200L F4 IS wide open :D.

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

7,951 views & 0 likes for this thread
Am i being fussy? 70-200 2.8 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 Rower2021
831 guests, 270 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.