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 07 Sep 2010 (Tuesday) 00:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 70-200 order of sharpness?

 
MOkoFOko
nut impotent and avoiding Geoff
Avatar
19,889 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Sep 07, 2010 02:21 |  #16

Ultimo~ wrote in post #10863345 (external link)
Can anyone comment on the general sharpness/IQ of the f4 non IS, thinking about picking one up in a few months as they are only ~$700, the f4 IS adds ~$600 which basically makes it a no-go.

Is it an awesome zoom for that price?

Is a tripod necessary for a lot of shots with a non IS?

It's decent... but it's at the very BOTTOM of the list when it comes to sharpness (below even the f/2.8 non-IS). In this case you do get what you pay for. The f/4 IS is leaps and bounds better than the f/4 non-IS.


My Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ckckevin
Goldmember
Avatar
1,439 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Bay Area
     
Sep 07, 2010 02:24 |  #17

Ultimo~ wrote in post #10863345 (external link)
Can anyone comment on the general sharpness/IQ of the f4 non IS, thinking about picking one up in a few months as they are only ~$700, the f4 IS adds ~$600 which basically makes it a no-go.

Is it an awesome zoom for that price?

There are plenty of threads answer your question, but generally, this thread should not be a based to whether people buy particular lens or not. When you need it, and your price range fits, get it. At different point of times, i owned all 4 of the lens (except mk2)The IQ that is mention here is not really extremely huge of a deal. Any lens mention here are L and are sharp! So just get one that suits your situation and budget. I recommand getting used, so you won't loose much value when you resell it later when you want to switch to a better one.


Kevin life= learning
500D, Canon 10-22mm, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, Canon 60 macro, Canon 85mm 1.8, Sigma 8mm 3.5, Sigma 30mm 1.4, Sigma 50-150mm 2.8, Kenko SP300 1.4x, efs extension tubes, 580EX, and lens that i don't like

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
taxsux
Senior Member
392 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 07, 2010 02:27 |  #18

Sharpness-wise

70-200 2.8 IS II
70-200 4.0 IS
70-200 2.8 NonIS
70-200 2.8 IS
70-200 4.0

I have owned all except the 4.0 IS but judging by reviews I put it as second.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cobra671
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
340 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: South Florida
     
Sep 07, 2010 05:19 |  #19

nonick wrote in post #10863285 (external link)
BTW, you want sharpness order or IQ order? IQ is more than just sharpness.

Ummm, I thought it was the same thing? Would one lens rate higher in one category and not the other? I was looking for overall picture quality, so I guess IQ.

I was looking at getting the 2.8 non-IS, prior to making this thread and I'm glad I did! I briefly owned the f4 non-IS version and I thought that was pretty good, now I will see if the differences will be obvious with the IS version.

Thanks for all replies folks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben805
Goldmember
1,195 posts
Likes: 73
Joined Mar 2007
     
Sep 07, 2010 07:40 |  #20

dudemanppl wrote in post #10863159 (external link)
f/2.8 IS II
f/4 IS
f/2.8
f/4
f/2.8 IS

IS elements make the image quality worse.

+1

that's my experience as well, the 2.8 IS version 1 was the softest 70-200 I have ever owned, not sure why I waited 3 years to sell it, hated that lens!


5D Mark III, Samyang 14mm, 35LII, 85L II, 100L IS Macro, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II. 580EX, AB400, AB800.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
itzcryptic
Goldmember
1,174 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Cincinnati
     
Sep 07, 2010 07:57 |  #21

Ultimo~ wrote in post #10863345 (external link)
Can anyone comment on the general sharpness/IQ of the f4 non IS, thinking about picking one up in a few months as they are only ~$700, the f4 IS adds ~$600 which basically makes it a no-go.

Is it an awesome zoom for that price?

Is a tripod necessary for a lot of shots with a non IS?

I have the 70-200 f/4 non-IS. Image quality is very good compared to my Canon 18-200 IS. I miss the IS though, so if I see the IS version come up used at a good price, I might grab it and sell the non-IS version.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shaftmaster
Goldmember
Avatar
1,429 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: above 5000 feet
     
Sep 07, 2010 09:39 |  #22

If you want the best bang for your buck, consider buying used. I bought my mint condition 70-200 f/4L IS lens for about $850 used. That was over a year ago but good deals can still be found, especially from people upgrading to the 70-200 f/2.8L IS mark 2.


Paul

Gear -- Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alpha_1976
Goldmember
Avatar
3,960 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2009
Location: USA
     
Sep 07, 2010 09:44 |  #23

taxsux wrote in post #10863384 (external link)
Sharpness-wise

70-200 2.8 IS II
70-200 4.0 IS
70-200 2.8 NonIS
70-200 2.8 IS
70-200 4.0

I have owned all except the 4.0 IS but judging by reviews I put it as second.

I have owned all (except 2.8 mark II) and this is exactly what I found.


I know more about gear than I know about photography :p
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,833 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Sep 07, 2010 09:55 as a reply to  @ taxsux's post |  #24

I've had the pleasure of owning all of these at one point or another, and currently own the f/4 IS and the f/2.8 IS II. I'd put them in this order:

70-200 2.8 IS II
70-200 4.0 IS
70-200 4.0
70-200 2.8 NonIS
70-200 2.8 IS

I think the bottom 3 are really splitting hairs. The f/2.8L IS II and the f/4 IS are clearly the top 2. From my experience I'd say the old f/2.8 IS is probably the worst wide open.

You can see in these comparison crops that the regular f/4 does well against the old f/2.8 IS.

@200mm (external link)

@70mm (external link)


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
taxsux
Senior Member
392 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 07, 2010 10:20 |  #25

I didn't like the images of the 2.8 IS MK1.

Performance wise it's great but IQ is really sub par with it's price tag. It can sharp in the outter lines of the subject but lacking 'crispness' in whole of the picture. And yes looking back at some of my older pics, the f/4.0 non IS is indeed better than the 2.8 IS sharpness wise in some frames.

I regret selling my 2.8 Non IS.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnny_boy
Member
75 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Pacific NW, USA
     
Sep 07, 2010 14:53 |  #26

I would agree with 2 bucketing system for these, and within the bucket the performance is very similar and you are splitting hairs. One might be better than the other within the bucket at wide vs. tele range for example, but overall they are very similar in performance.


Bucket 1 - Super Excellent :)
- 2.8 IS II
- 4.0 IS

Bucket 2 - Excellent :)
- 4.0
- 2.8
- 2.8 IS

For most people, any of these lens will be plenty sharp.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drfleury
Member
Avatar
38 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
     
Sep 07, 2010 15:15 |  #27

johnny_boy wrote in post #10866318 (external link)
I would agree with 2 bucketing system for these, and within the bucket the performance is very similar and you are splitting hairs. One might be better than the other within the bucket at wide vs. tele range for example, but overall they are very similar in performance.


Bucket 1 - Super Excellent :)
- 2.8 IS II
- 4.0 IS

Bucket 2 - Excellent :)
- 4.0
- 2.8
- 2.8 IS

For most people, any of these lens will be plenty sharp.

Although I have never tried the bucket 1 lenses, I own an 4.0 - non and have rented the 2.8 is and I for sure love my own 4-non better. And like also mentioned all of these will be plenty sharp for most people...


Canon 50D | Canon 15-85mm IS | Canon 70-200mm f/4 | Canon 300mm f/4 IS |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
int2str
Goldmember
1,881 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Fremont, CA
     
Sep 07, 2010 15:25 |  #28

canonnoob wrote in post #10862923 (external link)
2.8 IS ii
f4 is
2.8 is
f4 non IS
2.8 non is

Completely agree with this one.
Given my experience with the 2.8 non-IS, I'd place it a distant last in this list.
I'm very glad my new 2.8 IS II more than makes up for it though :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,340 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 200
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
Sep 07, 2010 16:30 |  #29

I agree with Tim...I've never owned the new 2.8ISmkII but the non IS 2.8 and f4 were both sharper than the 2.8IS's I've owned. Actually, the f4 non-IS is a really great lens...Yeah, it's f4, no it doesn't have IS but on a tripod or at higher shutter speed it's a VERY SOLID LENS.
They're all really great lenses IMHO, just depends on your needs/wants and your bank account.

timnosenzo wrote in post #10864695 (external link)
70-200 2.8 IS II
70-200 4.0 IS
70-200 4.0
70-200 2.8 NonIS
70-200 2.8 IS

I think the bottom 3 are really splitting hairs. The f/2.8L IS II and the f/4 IS are clearly the top 2. From my experience I'd say the old f/2.8 IS is probably the worst wide open.

You can see in these comparison crops that the regular f/4 does well against the old f/2.8 IS.

@200mm (external link)

@70mm (external link)


My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TT-00
Member
Avatar
195 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Washington
     
Sep 07, 2010 17:40 |  #30

johnny_boy wrote in post #10866318 (external link)
I would agree with 2 bucketing system for these, and within the bucket the performance is very similar and you are splitting hairs. One might be better than the other within the bucket at wide vs. tele range for example, but overall they are very similar in performance.


Bucket 1 - Super Excellent :)
- 2.8 IS II
- 4.0 IS

Bucket 2 - Excellent :)
- 4.0
- 2.8
- 2.8 IS

For most people, any of these lens will be plenty sharp.

So with this I should keep my F4 non IS and forget about the 2.8 IS I ....:)




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

10,684 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 70-200 order of sharpness?
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 sognibene
1053 guests, 322 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.