Topic: 70-200 2.8 IS (Read 6901 times)

imak · « **on:** October 09, 2008, 09:16:21 am »

Hello,

I own a 20d and 40d and I will upgrade to a 5D mkii and perhaps a 50D or later crop model.

Right now I'm ready to buy a 70-200 L lens and I prefer the 2.8 IS version.

My problem is that I don't know if the performance of this lens will be fine with the current high pixel density sensors. Is its resolution enough?

I have read that this lens is softer at 200mm and f.2.8, will this be worse with these or later cameras?
Also, I know that the f4 IS model is sharper and slightly better in image quality but is this difference visible in real conditions?

So please, if anyone uses this lens with a 50D or even a 1Ds Mkiii and can inform me about its performance will be very helpful.

Thank you very much in advance for your kind help,

Ioannis

Kagetsu · « **Reply #1 on:** October 09, 2008, 09:24:56 am »

Resolution handling, I don't think you're going to have a problem. After just checking through my stack of 1DsIII photos, I can't honestly say there was any issue with this lenses performance. In fact, I'd dare say that the 70-200 series from Canon (in any form) is about as good as it gets for that range... The 1Ds III certainly doesn't loose anything performance wise because of any lens drawbacks in this case anyway.

I can't comment on the 5D2 with this lens as far as AF performance goes, but judging by the same focus as the original 5D (I had two prior to my 1Ds III) and have to say, there lens was excellent on the 5D. Even edge performance with the AF wasn't bad for me personally anyway. It was and still is, the fastest lens I have for action stuff, as I've never had a need for telephoto primes... But that 200 F/2.0 looks mighty tasty. ^_~ But I digress...

If you need that range, it is the best you can get... and now relatively cheap too.

imak · « **Reply #2 on:** October 09, 2008, 09:43:31 am »

Thank you very much Kagetsu, have you ever noticed any softness at 200mm or compared the f2.8 IS version to f4 IS in terms of image quality?

Kagetsu · « **Reply #3 on:** October 09, 2008, 10:06:11 am »

Mine performs very well at 200... It 'could' be sharper, but realistically... thatd be a serious case of pixel peeping/nit picking.

I've not compared the f/4 IS performance to the f/2.8 IS, so I can't really help you there... The Internet trend seems to be that it's the best performing of all lensees released to date in that range... If you KNOW you won't require f/2.8 then it'd probably be easier to get the f/4... and cheaper.

Ken Bennett · « **Reply #4 on:** October 09, 2008, 12:58:37 pm »

I have both versions of the f/2.8 lens, with and without IS. I haven't tried the f/4 version.

With the 1Ds Mark III the IS version is very, very good. Could it be "sharper" at 200mm? Sure -- all zooms are at their worst at the extreme focal lengths. But that's like saying Paul Newman's eyes could be a little bluer.

If you *really* need the f/2.8 max aperture, then of course you need this lens. However, if you don't, the f/4 version is smaller, lighter, and much less expensive.

imak · « **Reply #5 on:** October 09, 2008, 02:26:10 pm »

Thank you k bennett,

Of course I need the 2.8 version, but i think that canon really messed up with these 2 lenses. A high end versatile and expensive model, targeted to pros, with inferior IQ than his little brother! They should have upgraded at first place their best in specifications and value lens.

but that's marketing...

pete_truman · « **Reply #6 on:** October 09, 2008, 02:46:35 pm »

I use the f2.8 IS model with a 1Ds3 and it never fails me at 70 or 200mm (or anything in between). Maybe a little sharper at the 200mm end but difficult to really see the difference even in a 30x20 print. A fantastic lens.
I did once have the f4 non-IS lens (have never tried the f4 IS version) and it too was sharp as nails. I used this on a 20D but have never tried it on the 1Ds, sorry! But much prefer the 2.8 IS despite its size and weight.

Kagetsu · « **Reply #7 on:** October 09, 2008, 06:15:25 pm »

In regards to their 70-200 f/4 IS outperforming... I'll start by saying that it's really no suprise. The zoom range from Canon has always been a little like that... On the other hand, the f/4 IS is very new, barely a year old, and when you consider how well the F/2.8 IS performs considering its age, you really would be hard pressed.
Don't be discouraged... When talking about real world performance, the f/2.8 IS wins simply because of the extra stopping power, with most of the difference pressent in MTF charts, which don't give an all around representation of real world performance. The difference in sharpness and contrast is about a 'poofteenth' (this is Australian old school slang) in anycase.

budjames · « **Reply #8 on:** October 09, 2008, 07:20:41 pm »

I've owned my 70-200 f2.8 IS lens for about 5 years now. I've used it on EOS 1VHS (film), 1DMkII, 1DsMkII, 10D, 20D and now on my current bodies: 40D and 1DsMkIII. It's a great lens, nice boka, very sharp and the IS really works. I just wish that it weighed about 1 pound less.

Bud James
www.budjamesphotography.com

Paul Sumi · « **Reply #9 on:** October 09, 2008, 08:42:47 pm »

Quote from: budjames

It's a great lens, nice boka, very sharp and the IS really works. I just wish that it weighed about 1 pound less.

+1 to all that, and mine has been a workhorse on everything from a 10D through 1D Mk2, 1DS Mk2 and I expect beyond.

Paul

Ronny Nilsen · « **Reply #10 on:** October 10, 2008, 02:38:04 am »

Quote from: budjames

I've owned my 70-200 f2.8 IS lens for about 5 years now. I've used it on EOS 1VHS (film), 1DMkII, 1DsMkII, 10D, 20D and now on my current bodies: 40D and 1DsMkIII. It's a great lens, nice boka, very sharp and the IS really works. I just wish that it weighed about 1 pound less.

Bud James
www.budjamesphotography.com

It's heavy, but the quality of the images from this lens is so good that it is is my favorite lens and I take it with me
even if it's heavy.

Ronny

geotzo · « **Reply #11 on:** October 10, 2008, 03:31:16 am »

Its a great lens, very sharp. Some say the non-IS version is slightly sharper, so if you don't really need IS, you may
do better plus the big price difference.

imak · « **Reply #12 on:** October 10, 2008, 06:29:47 am »

Thank you very much, Pete, Bud, Paul, Ronnie, GeoTzo
and of course Kagetsu.

I really appreciate your help.

Thanks to your comments I have decided to go for the 2.8 until I read, a couple of minutes ago, on fredmiranda a review for this lens by Maliketh
and now I'm really confused! Again.....

Can anyone please comment on this one?

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showpro....php?product=12

Thank you for your valuable time,
Ioannis

Ken Bennett · « **Reply #13 on:** October 10, 2008, 08:27:56 am »

Quote from: imak

Thanks to your comments I have decided to go for the 2.8 until I read, a couple of minutes ago, on fredmiranda a review for this lens by Maliketh
and now I'm really confused! Again.....

From the review you mentioned: "Bottom line: The 70-200 f/2.8 does not resolve on a 21mp sensor at anything less than f/5.6."

That's one person's opinion, and you don't know *anything* about the writer -- his (or her) experience, competence level, even what he means by "resolve." You don't know anything about ME or my experience or competence, either. Same for everyone else on the Internet.

It's easy to find on-line reviews trashing a great product, as well as praising a lousy one. That's the nature of the internet.

The only way to know if the lens will do what YOU want is for YOU to try it out under your personal shooting conditions. Make sure you buy it from a dealer who will take it back if you want to return it.

Kagetsu · « **Reply #14 on:** October 10, 2008, 09:28:19 am »

Personally I've found the images to be sharp... again thogh, it 'could' be sharper, but realistically there's probably more at play then the lens on its own.
I haven't got immediate access at higher apertures, as I primarily shoot down a f/2.8, but I took these two quickly. One is a crop of a corner of an image taken at 70mm's with zero resizing or anything outside normal post processing that lightroom does by default... The other is at 200mm's.

I should warn, that even with ISO 1000, and IS turned on, it's dark where these photos were taken, and it's late, after a long hard day at work. ^_~ So any real performance faults should be blamed on me, not the lens. As said... These are crops.

@ 200mm's F/8 ISO 1000.
http://www.madmilkdud.com/miscweb/4S0P6241.jpg

@70mm's F/8 ISO 1000.
http://www.madmilkdud.com/miscweb/4S0P6236.jpg

These are not perfect samples again... poor lighting, bad subject (a painting hanging on one of my walls) and shaky hands. ' Most of the blur is due to being hand held under these conditions. ^_~

I'll also add, that I wasn't very far from the image. Performance increase dramatically over a longer distance.

Paul Sumi · « **Reply #15 on:** October 10, 2008, 09:38:10 am »

Quote from: k bennett

The only way to know if the lens will do what YOU want is for YOU to try it out under your personal shooting conditions. Make sure you buy it from a dealer who will take it back if you want to return it.

I agree entirely. Also, while this is not a guarantee that *your* lens will perform the same way, if possible rent the lens and test drive it for a weekend. A lens is more than just image quality. Weight, build quality and ergonomics are also important factors and the only way to evaluate these is by actual use. For example, I rented the Canon 100-400 zoom and discovered I absolutely hated the push-pull zoom ring.

Paul

imak · « **Reply #16 on:** October 10, 2008, 10:58:19 am »

Kagetsu,
Thank you very much, again, for spending your valuable spare time to help me, I really appreciate this.
I hope I will be able to help you too, if you ever need anything.

imak · « **Reply #17 on:** October 10, 2008, 11:14:30 am »

Thanks K Bennett and Paul,

I agree completely, but in some cases your only option is to ask someone else.
We 're living in a remote area, no dealers , no rentals near.

I don't think that we must never trust anyone, but of course there are people that cannot appreciate an excellent product for different reasons each.

I understand that you 're satisfied with this lens, so I hope that I will be too.

Many thanks and
Best regards,
Ioannis

WilliamSC · « **Reply #18 on:** October 10, 2008, 12:26:53 pm »

I am very happy with my 70-200 L f2.8 IS on my 5D body . . . sharp and great bokoh; maybe a little soft at 70mm, but that is just my humble call. Primes will be sharper but as an overall lens, I'm happy with this one. The IS is important. Depending on your shooting circumstances, the f2.8 is reassuring.

I would suggest renting one for a week and shoot under different conditions. There are a few on-line rental companies that ship the lense to you with postage-paid on the return leg. Also, look for the Canon rebates and buy then.

David Sutton · « **Reply #19 on:** October 10, 2008, 03:10:30 pm »

I've had the f4 non IS and then the IS versions rather than the f2.8 for reasons of weight. I can't imagine a sharper lens short of getting a prime. At some time we have to stop fretting and go by this stuff and use it and work with its limitations and ours. When you come to purchase, if you are travelling to a city where there is a camera store, can you take a laptop with you? Borrow the lens for an hour or shoot in-store, and closely examine the test shots on screen. If you are in any doubt, ask for another copy and repeat the exercise. Good luck, David

Author Topic: 70-200 2.8 IS (Read 6901 times)