joayne Cream of the Crop  More info | Jul 07, 2007 18:50 | #16 Hmmmm, lightweight, outdoors, nature That is when I pick up my 70-200 f/4 non IS... joayne Contribute to POTN | Worldwide Photo Week
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RonaldS.Jr. Prodigal "Brick" Layer  More info | Jul 07, 2007 19:00 | #17 wordsworth03 wrote in post #3504378  I guess I don't understand why people think IS doesn't help much if you get 4 stops. It would be like having a 70-200 f1.2-f1.4 (minus the bokeh and slower shutter speed, but that depends on application). because at f/4, I'll get such a slow shutter speed in low light, IS won't matter. It won't be enough to stop people's action. 2.8 is twice as good at that. Also, fwiw, my 200L is super sharp wide open. Mac users swear by their computers. PC users swear at theirs.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
wordsworth03 Member 133 posts Joined Jan 2007 Location: portland, or More info | Jul 07, 2007 19:10 | #18 Ronald S. Jr. wrote in post #3504410 because at f/4, I'll get such a slow shutter speed in low light, IS won't matter. It won't be enough to stop people's action. 2.8 is twice as good at that. Also, fwiw, my 200L is super sharp wide open. Yeah, that I know the IS sacrifices shutter speed, but that all depends on the original poster's application of the lens, for which he specifically said he is not doing sports. And yes, just about any L lens will be sharp wide open, but I was just comparing the MTF numbers from photozone for all of the pixel-peepers on here.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RonaldS.Jr. Prodigal "Brick" Layer More info | Jul 07, 2007 19:12 | #19 were those MTF's wide open vs. wide open, or f/4 vs. f/4? Mac users swear by their computers. PC users swear at theirs.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
wordsworth03 Member 133 posts Joined Jan 2007 Location: portland, or More info | Yes, technology has made a lot of nice improvements for us
Canon 200 f2.8L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
RonaldS.Jr. Prodigal "Brick" Layer More info | Jul 07, 2007 19:19 | #21 200's sharper at f/8. Mac users swear by their computers. PC users swear at theirs.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
wimg Cream of the Crop  6,982 posts Likes: 209 Joined Jan 2007 Location: Netherlands, EU More info | Jul 07, 2007 20:01 | #22 Hi Ronald,
I've used the f/4L IS, and while I couldn't own one anyway (f/4 just isn't fast enough), I prefer the color, bokeh, and IQ of the 200 over it. Great little lens, though. Kind regards, Wim EOS R & EOS 5 (analog) with a gaggle of primes & 3 zooms, OM-D E-M1 Mk II & Pen-F with 10 primes, 6 zooms, 3 Metabones adapters/speedboosters, and an accessory plague
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 08, 2007 13:59 | #23 Just to say thanks to everyone for their helpful contributions-70-200 F/4 IS on order. Chris
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Overkill Goldmember  1,062 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Amsterdam Netherlands More info | Jul 08, 2007 14:51 | #24 troutfisher wrote in post #3507967 Just to say thanks to everyone for their helpful contributions-70-200 F/4 IS on order. Good choice.... Canon EOS 40D Gripped / 20D Gripped, EF 70-200 2.8L, [COLOR=black]EF 100-400 IS USM L, EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS USM, EF-S 10-22 USM, Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX Macro, Kenko 2XTC DG Kenko 1.4TC DG, Kenko Extension Tubes DG 12-20, Canon Speedlite 580EX, Manfrotto Tripod!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | 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 was a spammer, and banned as such! 2271 guests, 149 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
