frank_gross Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Wow !<br> Eric that is a no contest comparison - thanks for finding it - Canon hands down.<br> But you're off about the priceB&H lists the Nikon $590 and the Canon at $1500</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Am I getting the workings of the chart wrong or does the 70-300 zoom outperform the 200 prime here:<br> (both at f11 and both set on 200mm)<br> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=4&LensComp=245&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=5</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arie_vandervelden1 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>You got it right but I'd say they're within error.</p> <p>I own the 200/2.8 and I can tell you it's very sharp and contrasty when stopped down.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Thanks Arie. But even if I change the 200mm aperture setting to 5.6 or f8 the zoom still appears to beat the prime which is very surprising to me<br> But this is not the case with the 85/1.8 or the 135/2 primes</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arie_vandervelden1 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>At f/5.6 the prime is just a tad sharper, and it has more contrast. I would not worry about this though. If you have the cash I think you'll be very pleased with the 70-300L<br /> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=2&LensComp=245&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Is it possible that the favour would swing from one lens to another after a certain f-stop?<br /> I am comparing the 70-200/4 and the 70- 300/4-5.6 and the 70-200 is better up to f8 and then the 70-300 is better?<br /> (comparing them at 200mm)<br /> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=738&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=4&LensComp=404&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=4</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>You can compare these charts til you are blue in the face, IMO its better to go for real world examples. Both are very high quality so just a trade off of range vs variable aperture, size etc. I have a 70-200 2.8 IS II and the 70-300L and its splitting hairs to see much difference at similar apertures.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Dave,<br> Your suggestion & link to using the 70-200 plus a 1.4x extender seems off to me. The 70-300 looks way better, no?<br> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=7&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric merrill Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Frank:</p> <p>The Canon 70-300L is about $1500. The 70-300 (non-L) is $550. The latter compares well with the 70-300 Nikon one for $590. </p> <p>For the 200 vs 70-300L, you can compare MTF charts here:</p> <p><a href="http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_200mm_f_2_8l_ii_usm">http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_200mm_f_2_8l_ii_usm</a></p> <p><a href="http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_70_300mm_f_4_5_6l_is_usm">http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_70_300mm_f_4_5_6l_is_usm</a></p> <p>The 200 wins some criteria and the 70-300L wins some. For real world photos, you're not going to notice much difference. The 70-300L is 22 years newer. I would expect its optical properties to be better than lens from 22 years ago. The 200 prime is so good that it still holds up to new contenders. :)</p> <p>If you need a faster aperture, I'd choose the 70-200/2.8L IS. I went with the 70-300L due to its longer range. I already owned fast primes lenses throughout that range. So I wanted a longer range zoom that delivered fantastic image quality, combined with great IS, and extremely fast focusing. That's what the $1500 buys you.</p> <p>Eric</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Am I getting the workings of the chart wrong or does the 70-300 zoom outperform the 200 prime here:<br />(both at f11 and both set on 200mm)</p> </blockquote> <p>Hardly surprising as you're comparing a sloooooow zoom at f/11 and a fast prime at the same aperture. At f/11 the 200mm prime will be suffering from diffraction. Compare it to the prime at f4 or f5.6 and it will be a different story. I own the 200m prime and it is outstanding.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share Posted March 10, 2012 <p>Just a note to say thanks to everyone for their input.<br> The 70-300L IS /f4-5.6 overall best suits my needs.<br> (with the 70-200L IS /f4 a close runner up. The 2.8 IS is way out of reach @ $2300).<br> The 70-300 is small enough to be a hand-held walkabout 'city graphics/candid/Jay Maisel pic style' lens, and it's also long enough to facilitate 'composed countryside landscapes'. I like the extra 100mm over the 200.<br> It's not without various drawbacks/concerns though. These are stated in various comments & reviews...<br> It is also expensive for my pocket so I'll be looking out for a used copy to try and bring it within reach (plus i need the overpriced tripod collar). Maybe I'll sell my 135mm/2 prime to finance a chunk of it.</p> <p>Thanks again.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric merrill Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Frank:</p> <p>I'd at least try the 70-300L before plunking down the cash for a tripod collar. I thought I wanted one, too. I rarely end up using this lens on a tripod, and when I have, it hasn't been an issue.</p> <p>Eric</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 11, 2012 Author Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Hi Eric,<br> I woke up this morning to look at the resolution comparisons again; and am again in doubt - this morning the 70-200/4 seems better across the focal range & across the apertures<br> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=3&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=3<br> I'd miss the extra reach of another 100mm but i don't want lesser optical sharpness/quality<br> Thanks for the link to jacks - I'll take a look</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Few samples of the 70-300L</p> <p>60D + 70-300L at 300mm 5.6.<br> <p>60D + 70-300L at 230mm 5.6.<br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_gross Posted March 11, 2012 Author Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Nice ! Tommy</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Thanks, I never really take photos of animals at the zoo, just something kinda silly about it but this thread had me thinking I have not used this lens much of late so I thought I would take it out for the day. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <p>I never really thought a lot about IS in the past, but the IS on this lens is pretty amazing, I have gotten sharp photos at 1/10 300mm. This one is at 277mm, 1/25. </p> <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