donald_weston1 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 <p>That sums it up, I guess, for prints, 24x36 or bigger, do not want heavier or faster lenses, no F2.8 versions or<br> primes. For use with an impending 5D2. Which would lead to better quality. I know the 70-200L IS F4 would be best<br> by itself, but that is not the question this time. I want to have about 280-300mm on long end. I have used the 70-300<br> in the past with a 5D, but don't know if it will hold up to the demands with the updated body....thanks looking for user<br> opinions please..Don</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stock-Photos Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 <p>Your image making technique will have at least as much impact in big print sharpness, as the lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_osullivan Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 <p>On sharpness (which is what I assume you are most concerned about) they'll be about the same. On contrast and color, the 70-200 tc combo will win.</p> <p>I agree with J. Harrington that the more important component here will be your technique, proper lighting and post processing.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g dan mitchell Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 <p>In my view 24 x 36 inch prints are really on the boundary of what you might attempt with a 5D II. Depending upon the subject and your expectations, <em>everything</em> will need to be carefully optimized in order for this to work well. I would plan to always use a tripod, MLU, and a remote release and to be extremely attentive to things like wind. I'd also be extraordinarily careful about focus - perhaps using live view at 10X to scope out the focus throughout the frame. I guess I'm agreeing (strongly) with the previous messages about technique. Even then, you are pushing it.</p> <p>If you are really very serious about doing a number of prints at such large sizes I would look for the very best lenses at the focal lengths you plan to shoot and not compromise in any way - either a less capable lens or a TC.</p> <p>Dan</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peza Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 <p>I bet you don't want to hear that, but - for shooting at 300m for 36" print you need 300mm prime to get what I would call satisfactory result.<br> You will see difference between 300/2.8 and 300/4 at this print size. Let alone the zooms or zoom with TC.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin carron Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 <p>All other things being equal the 70-200 f4 IS L + 1.4 TC will give better results at any size than the 70-300 IS. This is because apart from the additional sharnpess the colour and contrast of the 70-200 are better than the 70-300.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 <p>If you are happy with the results from your lens on your 5D, chances are you will be happy with the results on the Mark II. Why don't you try out the 70-300mm when you get your camera and see if you are happy with the IQ?</p> <p>For those of you making recommendations of one lens over the other, have you actually tested the two lens combinations side-by-side? If so, please post the results. I have tested numerous Nikon consumer lenses vs their pro counterparts and in general have found little difference <em>if any</em> in IQ - the main differences I see are generally in focus speed and low light capabilities. I won't speculate on the lenses listed by the OP because I don't have them but my experiences have shown me that inexpensive lenses often deliver IQ comparable to their expensive counterparts. The results can also vary based on what post processing is done to them. Minor and even some major 'imperfections' can often be corrected during post processing. For example, purple fringing and vignetting are easily corrected by some software programs during PP.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_weston1 Posted June 10, 2009 Author Share Posted June 10, 2009 <p>One more question, at this print size, would there be any benefit to using say a 50D with the 70-200IS L without the TC over the 5D2 with? What are the tradeoffs here, assuming ISO 100 in both cases and everyshot ideally, mirror up, etc...would the higher pixel density be advantageous over the higher pixel count.....? i.e. which print would look more detailed?<br> greatly appreciate comments here also..Don</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g dan mitchell Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 <p>Elliot, I have not shot the two lenses side by side, though I'm very familiar with the 70-200mm w/o the TC. That said, if there is ever a situation that "stresses" (or tests) the capability of a lens (not to mention ones shooting and post processing techniques) it is shooting a DSLR with the intention of making such large prints.</p> <p>I'll agree that in many cases a non-L lens can produce extremely high quality images - though this is more frequently the case with primes than with zooms. This is particularly the case if you don't make gigantic prints. But 24" x 36" is very big for a DSLR original and as I and others wrote above, the lens is only one of several limiting factors here.</p> <p>Dan</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_weston1 Posted June 10, 2009 Author Share Posted June 10, 2009 <p>I also wonder if just using the 70-200L IS f4 and cropping with the 5D2 might yield a better result, any further comments on this option....</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now