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 27 Feb 2013 (Wednesday) 04:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS vs Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS for landscape/travel photo?

 
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 03, 2013 14:30 |  #31

g3org3y wrote in post #15671482 (external link)
At 70mm, max aperture is 4. At 300mm, max aperture is 5.6. For those who own one, can you tell me what is the maximum focal length at one is able to maintain the f/4 aperture?

It can go to f/4.0 from 70 to 103 mm...

70-103mm = f/4.0
104-154mm = f/4.5
155-228mm = f/5.0
229-300mm = f/5.6


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 03, 2013 20:14 |  #32

Mk1Racer wrote in post #15671159 (external link)
Can anyone comment (from real-world experience) on IQ with a 70-300L vs. a 70-200 f/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC?

vsocks wrote in post #15662847 (external link)
I own the 70-200 2.8 II and find it hard to imagine the 70-300 could compare....

I own both lenses and they have similar IQ. The 70-300L is really sharp wide open and has very good contrast and saturation. In my experience, it is is slightly better than the 70-200 + 1.4x TC (Kenko).


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mk1Racer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,735 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Flagtown, NJ
     
Mar 03, 2013 20:26 |  #33

sebr wrote in post #15673391 (external link)
I own both lenses and they have similar IQ. The 70-300L is really sharp wide open and has very good contrast and saturation. In my experience, it is is slightly better than the 70-200 + 1.4x TC (Kenko).

Interesting. Any chance you could do some comparison shots?

Maybe 70-200 @ 70 and 200 (f/4 and f/5.6 respectively) as well as w/ the 1.4 TC (at 280) at f/4 and at f/5.6 and the 70-300 @ 70, 200, and 280, wide open.

One of the things I do like about the 70-200 f/2.8, is that you can shoot in a reasonably well lit gym w/o strobes.


7D, BG-E7, BGE2x2 (both FS), 17-55 f/2.8 IS, 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS (FS), 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8, 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mk I, 70-300 f/4-5.6L, 550EX, Kenko Pro300 1.4xTC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 04, 2013 00:40 |  #34

Mk1Racer wrote in post #15673443 (external link)
Interesting. Any chance you could do some comparison shots?

Maybe 70-200 @ 70 and 200 (f/4 and f/5.6 respectively) as well as w/ the 1.4 TC (at 280) at f/4 and at f/5.6 and the 70-300 @ 70, 200, and 280, wide open.

One of the things I do like about the 70-200 f/2.8, is that you can shoot in a reasonably well lit gym w/o strobes.

I will try to do some simple testing, hopefully today... It depends on what the OP or you are interested in, but I am thinking of shooting one object probably indoors and at relatively close range. I don't think I will have the time to go and shoot...


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lsquare
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,933 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
     
Mar 04, 2013 01:38 |  #35

sebr wrote in post #15674110 (external link)
I will try to do some simple testing, hopefully today... It depends on what the OP or you are interested in, but I am thinking of shooting one object probably indoors and at relatively close range. I don't think I will have the time to go and shoot...

Can you take a picture at 70mm, 200mm, and 300mm for me?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 04, 2013 03:05 |  #36

OK. I will try to shoot wide open at these focal lengths to see differences in sharpness and background separation using the 2 lenses. I will post unprocessed images and 100% crops... Does that make sense?
I should also mention that I have the 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, no the f/4.0 IS version...


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 04, 2013 20:41 |  #37

Here are some test shots. The shots were not taken in optimal conditions, but they were all shot on tripod with remote trigger and mirror locked up. All shots were taken in RAW format and converter to JPEG in Photoshop with minor adjustments in white balance and exposure. 0 sharpening.

It looks like I focused on the eyes in some shots and on the nose in other shots. This is not something I do often as I prefer to test my lenses on 'real' shots, but I hope this test helps anyway...

All shots at ISO1600, wide open

70-300L

70mm

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8519/8529161003_489536a0cf_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8390/8530273842_f77b6440ba_c.jpg

135mm
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8373/8530272830_77dcc1fc44_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8506/8530273172_af5f751dd7_c.jpg

200mm
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8103/8529159621_8b26d9a694_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8108/8530272426_cc35202cb6_c.jpg

300mm
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8530271538_66243c7136_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8371/8529159255_9cd9939597_c.jpg

Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 04, 2013 20:51 |  #38

70-200L f/2.8 IS II

70mm

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8382/8529163405_a27dbdd45a_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8093/8530276150_bcdf51cfda_c.jpg

135mm
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8506/8530275442_2b822b47d0_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8385/8529163121_d1ef5dbf02_c.jpg

200mm
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8385/8530274926_0645c4e82d_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8524/8530275108_fb74cd51e9_c.jpg

Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 04, 2013 20:55 |  #39

70-200L f/2.8 IS II + 1.4x TC (Kenko DG Pro300)

280mm

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8090/8529161703_27f3bb3d4a_c.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8521/8529162069_b68b612fbc_c.jpg

Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lsquare
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,933 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
     
Mar 05, 2013 04:12 |  #40

Thanks a lot for the photos. The difference between 200mm and 300mm is quite noticeable.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 05, 2013 19:44 |  #41

Here are also a couple of reviews you should check

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …IS-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)
(this one has a focal length comparison on a portrait if that's something you are wondering about)

http://www.canonrumors​.com …70-300-f4-5-6l-is-review/ (external link)
(use for safari, travel)


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ateet
Senior Member
271 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Mar 05, 2013 20:04 |  #42

I pondered so much over this and 70-200 f/4L IS that I already had, used and loved. Adorama had a great deal in Sep of last year on this lens and there was another more I believe earlier this year from Amazon/Adorama.

I'd not pay the price it's listed for; but considering it takes so less real estate in the bag is such a big plus. I am not afraid to carry just this lens to zoo, fruit picking and many other eveents.


Canon 5D Mk III | EF 24-70L II | EF 135L | EF 70-300L | EF 50mm f/1.8 | 580EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wombatHorror
Goldmember
1,937 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NJ
     
Mar 05, 2013 23:08 |  #43

Mk1Racer wrote in post #15671159 (external link)
Can anyone comment (from real-world experience) on IQ with a 70-300L vs. a 70-200 f/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC?

70-300L is definitely better than 70-200 f/4 IS + 1/4x TC is a bit better than 70-200 2.8 non-IS + 1.4x TC is def better than 70-200 2.8 IS + 1.4x TC so yeah 70-300L is better than 70-200 2.8 IS + 1.4x TC. (although putting it like that exaggerates the total difference a bit)

(I assume you are talking the 2.8 IS original and not the Mark II)

I still don't know why Canon doesn't put the R&D effort into a 70-300 f/4L IS, but spent all that effort on the 200-400 f/4L + 1.4xTC unicorn. If a 70-300 f/4-5.6L is $1400 (Amazon), I would think the constant f/4 version would be $3500-$4000. Granted, that's a lot of coin, but I think that would be an amazing lens.

Because a 70-300 is suddenly a much bulkier lens and not a little travel lens or one that gets into as many stadiums for the times you don't have a press pass.

I could see some use for that lens though, but they can only make so many. There is a big demand for 100-400 for more reach and for a slower 70-300 for compact size and I guess they didn't feel the need to make a third option.

Sigma does make a 100-300 f/4.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wombatHorror
Goldmember
1,937 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NJ
     
Mar 05, 2013 23:17 |  #44

Mk1Racer wrote in post #15673443 (external link)
Interesting. Any chance you could do some comparison shots?

Maybe 70-200 @ 70 and 200 (f/4 and f/5.6 respectively) as well as w/ the 1.4 TC (at 280) at f/4 and at f/5.6 and the 70-300 @ 70, 200, and 280, wide open.

One of the things I do like about the 70-200 f/2.8, is that you can shoot in a reasonably well lit gym w/o strobes.

If you save the images and flip between them you can see the difference even more clearly than tryng to scroll up and down or look back and forth. Look for crisp micro-contrast how dark green to suddenly bright off-white t he details go.

Here is the 70-300L 100% crop:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


And the 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC III (which did better than the 70-200 f/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC so the difference to that lens would definitely be larger than the difference show here):
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


I believe this was done with best of at least 6 live view 10x zoom manual focusing attempts for each image, tripod, remote release.

Yeah 70-300L in a gym without strobes is kinda rough!! Although with the FF performance these days I guess you could squeak by if it was like a nice Division 1 men's basketball arena.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wombatHorror
Goldmember
1,937 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NJ
     
Mar 05, 2013 23:23 as a reply to  @ wombatHorror's post |  #45

Another 70-300L vs 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC III comparison (again compared to 70-200 f/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC the difference would be even larger).

again, save and flip between them makes difference even more apparent:

200% crops this time
you can see the 70-300L has more bite, black to white transitions are crisper with more bite and clarity (and the difference would be a bit larger comparing to your 70-200 2.8 IS which does worse at 200mm than the 70-200 f/4 IS)

70-300L:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC III:
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO



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

10,202 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS vs Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS for landscape/travel photo?
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 Knoxville_Photographer
944 guests, 267 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.