Canon 70-200

[roberthoude]

My question is: I have read that Canon 70-200 f4 IS is maybe not sharp from 135-200, is it the case for all those lenses, or it is happening just with a few ?

Best regards

[dougj]

There are a lot of posts on DPreview in the Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum related to this lens.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1029

Your question might have already been answered there, if not it's a good place to ask.

[roberthoude]

There are a lot of posts on DPreview in the Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum related to this lens.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1029

Your question might have already been answered there, if not it's a good place to ask.

Thanks Doug: but it is there what a few say that it could be soft, how is yours 70-200 f2.8 ?

[dougj]

Thanks Doug: but it is there what a few say that it could be soft, how is yours 70-200 f2.8 ?

Yeah, DPR is mostly focused on hardware and it seems the pursuit of perfection. Still, there are some good posts and comparisons, but you need to interpret the comments as they relate to your needs.

I’ve shot with the 70-200 2.8/L IS for about 5 years, and tend to shoot a lot at 200mm. My experiences have been very good, even with a 1.4X TC. Wide open my copy tends to be a little soft at all focal lengths, but this is relative and I’m still satisfied with the image quality.

Another consideration for the aperture is the DOF. At 200mm, f/2.8, 20 foot subject distance on a 10D/20D/30D the DOF is only 5 inches.

Why buy the f/2.8 lens if the DOF is so shallow? The camera’s AF operates at the maximum aperture of the lens, not the shot setting, so the AF is fast. Shooting at f/2.8 may be desirable for a nice bokeh, or if there is minimal light and you want a faster SS.

Here are some examples of shots with and without the 1.4 TC at various apertures, mostly at the long end.

70-200 f2.8L IS

Banded Pitta -1/25s f/5.0 at 200mm iso800 with Flash
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/22882831

Blue-faced Honeyeater - 1/40s f/4.0 at 200mm iso400 with Flash
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/33772475

Griffon Vulture, looking for lunch - 1/250s f/5.0 at 200mm iso200:
http://www.pbase.com/image/21779142

Hyacinth Macaw - 1/180s f/3.5 at 185mm iso400:
http://www.pbase.com/image/19477009

Green-winged Macaw - 1/320s f/3.5 at 200mm iso400:
http://www.pbase.com/image/16038760

Palm Cockatoo - 1/400s f/3.5 at 200mm iso400 with Flash:
http://www.pbase.com/image/16575199

White-faced Saki - 1/250s f/2.8 at 70mm iso400 with flash
http://upload.pbase.com/image/16709856

White-faced Saki, Female - 1/90s f/2.8 at 73mm iso200 with flash
http://www.pbase.com/image/16709853

Livingston Turaco – 1/100 f/2.8 at 180mm, iso400 with flash
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/26484632

Lion – 1/750, f/2.8 at 200mm, iso100
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/42942855/original


70-200 f2.8L IS + 1.4X II TC
The TC adds 1 stop, so shots at f/4.0 are wide open.

White-crowned Hornbill - 1/320s f/5.6 at 98mm iso400 with Flash HH:
http://www.pbase.com/image/21758761

White-headed Vulture - 1/400s f/7.1 at 280mm iso400 with Flash HH:
http://www.pbase.com/image/21071389

Scheepmaker's Crowned pigeon - 1/50s f/5.0 at 280mm iso800 with Flash :
http://www.pbase.com/image/23566838

Black-winged Starling - 1/320s f/5.6 at 280mm iso400 with Flash
http://www.pbase.com/image/20573207

Red-throated Bee Eater, mid-day stretch - 1/80s f/5.0 at 280mm iso800 with Flash HH:
http://www.pbase.com/image/21779155

Crested Jay – 1/250 f/4.0 at 280mm, iso800 with flash
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/21815458/original

Greetings – 1/500, f/4.0 at 280mm, iso800 with flash
http://www.pbase.com/dougj/image/17585926/original

The new Canon 70-200 f/4.0L IS gets excellent reviews, and you might consider this lens. You really don't loose much between 2.8 & 4.0, and this lens performs well wide open at a more attractive cost & weight.

I hope this helps Robert.

[roberthoude]

Thanks Doug, its help.

Best regards

[simplephotography]

It took me three months to decide, and I'm going for the f4 IS. It gets better reviews than the 2.8 IS (especially at the long end), it's cheaper, lighter and has an amazing 3 to 4 stop IS. Which really is amazing. I've seen razor sharp images at 200mm at 1/20. The only reason why you should buy a 2.8 IS these days, is if you really need the 2.8 for low light or extremely shallow DOF.