cepaw Member 133 posts Likes: 3 Joined Sep 2010 More info | Dec 28, 2012 10:20 | #1 I'm looking at getting a 70-200. I'm I correct in saying that the image quality between the 2.8 is v1 and the f4 is will be the same ? If so I can get a used 2.8 for the price of a new f4. I don't normally buy used lenses but if seems to make sense to get the 2.8 if I can ($1,500 budget) is the focus and IS the same on both ? Thanks www.michaelrhodesphotography.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Dec 28, 2012 10:27 | #2 No. Not correct at all. Each of these versions of the lens is different optically. The f4 IS is the second sharpest, after only the 2.8 IS II. Its not just a matter of adding IS to a lens, each version is a total redesign.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
bobbyz Cream of the Crop 20,506 posts Likes: 3479 Joined Nov 2007 Location: Bay Area, CA More info | Dec 28, 2012 10:38 | #3 i had all versions. the differences are very very small.if one can tell them apart in say 16x20 prints i will buy them costco hot dog lunch. Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
LOG IN TO REPLY |
sonek00 Member  96 posts Likes: 4 Joined Jun 2012 Location: Chula Vista More info | Dec 30, 2012 23:53 | #4 gonzogolf wrote in post #15416302  No. Not correct at all. Each of these versions of the lens is different optically. The f4 IS is the second sharpest, after only the 2.8 IS II. Its not just a matter of adding IS to a lens, each version is a total redesign. I was wonder this as well, So the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS v.1 is not as sharp as the f/4 is? 1D Mark IV, 5DmkIII, R6, 24-70mm f2.8 II L, Canon 85mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 40mm 2.8 Pancake, 430ex II, 430ex III-RTx2, 600ex II-RT, 90ex
LOG IN TO REPLY |
kin2son Goldmember 4,546 posts Likes: 3 Joined May 2011 Location: Sydney, Australia More info | Dec 31, 2012 00:11 | #5  Permanent banThe order goes like this - 5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
LOG IN TO REPLY |
E.J.Peiker Member 33 posts Joined Mar 2011 More info | Dec 31, 2012 11:16 | #6 kin2son wrote in post #15426132 The order goes like this - f2.8 IS II > f4 IS > f2.8 non-IS > f2.8 IS > f4 non-IS. Reminder - This is nip picking and when comparing in 100%. In the end, they are all great. I my experience with all 5, I would reverse the last two
LOG IN TO REPLY |
bobbyz Cream of the Crop 20,506 posts Likes: 3479 Joined Nov 2007 Location: Bay Area, CA More info | Dec 31, 2012 11:22 | #7 Depends on the copies. My 70-200mmf 2.8 IS I was almost as good as my 70-200mm f2.8 IS II. Did some comparisons with 135L also.I only did at f2.8 where it matters more. Now at the time I didn't do at all focal lengths. Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
LOG IN TO REPLY |
E.J.Peiker Member 33 posts Joined Mar 2011 More info | Dec 31, 2012 15:15 | #8 Yeah that's me, I've been on here a while; just don't post that often. I shoot with Canon gear often enough and do tons of testing on it so i think I'm allowed
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jimewall Goldmember 1,871 posts Likes: 11 Joined May 2008 Location: Cleveland, Ohio More info | Dec 31, 2012 16:16 | #9 bobbyz wrote in post #15427552 BTW - Welcome to the forum, if you are the E.J. from naturescapes.net. You didn't want to welcome him if it wasn't the same guy? Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sirrith Cream of the Crop More info | Dec 31, 2012 21:05 | #10 kin2son wrote in post #15426132 The order goes like this - f2.8 IS II > f4 IS > f2.8 non-IS > f2.8 IS > f4 non-IS. Reminder - This is nip picking and when comparing in 100%. In the end, they are all great. IME, the f4 non-IS is just behind the f4 IS. The 2.8 non-IS probably is on the same level as those 2, and the 2.8 IS Mk I is the last. -Tom
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 01, 2013 01:22 | #11 These comparisons from f/4 to f/2.8 lens are wide open compares, and very close as was said. Stop down the f/2.8 lenses to f/4 and I believe all the f/2.8 lenses move to the head of the pack. The Digital Picture website has a great tool that you can compare lens sharpness at different apertures. Mike
LOG IN TO REPLY |
LowriderS10 Cream of the Crop  10,170 posts Likes: 12 Joined Mar 2008 Location: South Korea / Canada More info | Jan 01, 2013 01:39 | #12 They're all ridiculously sharp and so close together that even if one is model is sharper than the other, copy-to-copy variations would cancel most of that out...your choice in which lens to get should hinge on other factors (cost, max aperture needed, and whether you need IS...perhaps weight, if you're concerned about that), NOT sharpness... -=Prints For Sale at PIXELS=-
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tickerguy Senior Member 595 posts Joined Dec 2012 More info | Jan 01, 2013 16:28 | #13 I own a f/4 IS and it's the sharpest lens I have, and it is rock-solid in its ability to grab focus as well. Canon 7D & 5d3, EF-S 15-85, 24-105L, 70-200L f/4 IS, 100mm Macro/L, EF 50 f/1.4 and more
LOG IN TO REPLY |
paulkaye Senior Member  559 posts Likes: 3 Joined Nov 2010 Location: Leamington, UK More info | Jan 01, 2013 16:59 | #14 If you haven't handled the lenses before, you'll be surprised at the difference in weight between the f2.8 and f4 versions. When I bought my 70-200 f4 IS, I had every intention of buying the f2.8, but found the weight of it just too much. The f4 zoom is MUCH lighter. Paul
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 01, 2013 18:55 | #15 |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is EBiffany 1386 guests, 112 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
Cceck my threads where i compared my ver I and II with 135L.
