richard_martin10
-
Posts
268 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by richard_martin10
-
-
<p>Mike, my 70-200 f/4 is the non IS version.</p>
-
My experience with this lens is outdoor sports. It is my main auto racing lens, used for about 75% of my work. IQ is brilliant, very sharp, excellent AF performance. About a year ago I fell into the "upgrade" trap and sold it for a non IS 2.8 version. While I initially was very happy about the purchase I began to realize that for my usage the 2.8 offered me nothing better then what the F/4 version gave me. It was much heavier, I never used it at 2.8 in the daylight world of motorsports, and after closely examining photos taken with each lens I came to the conclusion that there was no difference in IQ. I sold the 2.8 and bought another F/4 and will probably not trade it for anything. The light weight is a big plus for following fast moving cars, it balances very well on my 40D, and when you consider cost and performance I doubt there is anything on the market that comes even close.
-
<p>I bought a 70-200 F/4 super mint condition with a 2008 date code on 3/2009 for 415.00 on Ebay. I also purchased a 70-200 F/2.8 and a 400 F/5.6, both super mint with 2007 date codes on 9/2008, the 400 was 900.00 and the 2.8 was a best offer of 850.00. I've since sold off the 2.8 because it's really unneccessary for daytime motorsports and got 950.00 for it. I'm looking for a 70-200 F/4 IS as it seems all the test results show it has the best IQ of all the 70-200 zooms, and was also considering adding the 200 2.8 prime. This is where my rant comes from.....I've gotten nice deals on super lenses as little as a year ago, now pricing is ridiculous........I'm giving it another week or so, then I'll just purchase new out of the City.</p>
-
<p>This is more of a rant then a question, I want to make a few changes in the lens bag for my upcoming motorsports season and have been shopping on Ebay. Its been a major frustration, it seems to me that people are paying way to much for used lenses. You can buy a 70-200 F/2.8 out of New York City for 1289.00 gray market or 1300.00 USA warranty. I've seen several used ones over the last few weeks sell over the price of a new one. The F/4 version of the same lens is 639.00 out of most NYC stores, people are paying well over 550.00 for used copies and in some cases just as much as a new one. Used 2.8 lenses with date codes from the early to mid 90's are not worth 1000.00 to 1100.00 when a new one is only 200.00 more. Someone recently paid over 800.00 for a 300 F/4L that was described as having haze and fungus on the glass, unusable unless serviced or used for parts. What does servicing a lens like that cost? Seems to me at least 200-300 bucks, why would you do that when about 1200.00 buys a new one? What gives?</p>
-
<p>Check here for a test report on the Tamron 17-50 with VC.<a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/482-tamron_1750_28vc_canon">http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/482-tamron_1750_28vc_canon</a><br>
Seems like the performance is nowhere near the non-VC version which I have. Its a fantastic lens. Excellent IQ, extremely sharp, AF performance is fine, both speed and accuracy have never been an issue for me. Go get one, its a great lens! </p>
-
<p>Use the servo mode to follow moving objects. Hold the shutter halfway down and get a focus lock on your subject, then follow your subject while still holding the shutter halfway down until the shot is what you want, then fire away! The camera will constantly adjust focus while you follow your subject. I use this method to track fast moving race cars and it works like a charm.</p>
-
<p>Another link to some more motorsports photos:<br>
And one more:<br>
Most taken with the 70-200 F/4, a few with the 400 F/5.6</p>
-
<p>I am an avid motorsports shooter, I've had lots of pics published in magazines and websites. I've also been down this road with both the prime and zoom 2.8 lenses and the F/4 non IS version. In the end I decided to keep the 70-200 F/4 version for several reasons. The IQ is exactly the same for both zooms, the F/4 version is light and nimble and gives up nothing in AF speed to any other lens, and the biggest reason is I never use 2.8 for any motorsports shooting, its just not neccessary, so why lug around that big lump of glass. Most of the settings for daytime shooting are F/5.6 to F/8 with shutter speeds from 1/500 to 1/800, ISO 100 or 200. I also have a 400 F/5.6 to compliment and its all you need for any shot at the track that you'll encounter. As far as the extra sharpness that the 200 prime will give you, if your subject is static I agree that the prime may be a tad sharper, but for the fast moving cars and the blur that may not be avoidable in motorsports, you won't gain any advantage.....if anything, the slight blur of background, tires, and wheels is a neccessary element of this type of photo so for me, the versatility of the zoom wins out.</p><div>
</div>
-
<p>The F/4 version has been reviewed as a superb performer, perhaps the best zoom lens available today. I've used both versions extensively in my auto racing work, in daylight you can't beat the IQ of the F/4 version, if you are working indoors then the 2.8 is a better bet. I do very little indoor or low light so my choice is the F/4, much lighter, easier to handle, fantastic IQ......remember that IS will not help you with moving objects!</p>
-
<p>The 300 F/4 IS is a fine lens but not ideal for indoor sports and many people are mistaken that IS will help with moving objects. I don't do much indoor work in dim lighting but I'll tell you this, even outside under the murky conditions that I sometimes encounter in my auto racing work that even a 2.8 lens is not enough unless you boost the ISO up to very high levels. I still feel that the non IS 70-200 F/2.8 is the best choice for the OP, the IQ is so good you can crop photos up and still have super sharp results.</p>
-
<p>I disagree that the 70-200 2.8 IS is the best lens for the job, IS is of no use for moving objects so you can save yourself a bunch of money and go with the non IS version of the 2.8 lens. </p>
-
<p>I had both of these lenses and kept the 70-200. AF performance is far superior as is build quality and optical performance. The 70-300 is a fine lens but it is not in the same league as the 70-200 in image quality. IS is the only advantage that it has.</p>
-
<p>Here is a resolution comparison chart from digital-picture.com<br>
From personal experience the 400 is much sharper then the 300 & 1.4 combo. You lose AF speed, and I feel that because you are dealing with 3x the glass in the 300/1.4 combo that you can't help but lose IQ. Put the 400 on a tripod for low light situations and you will be very happy with the result. The 400 is a lens I use constantly for my auto racing needs, I handhold it without problem, and the IQ is fantastic.</p>
-
<p>I had a 70-300 IS and while I really liked the IQ of the lens, the AF speed was slow. Compared to the 70-200 it is not even in the same ball park. Most of my telephoto work is auto racing, my keeper rate with the L lens is about 80%, with the 70-300 IS it was barely 33%. If you are shooting things that aren't moving or moving slowly the 70-300 is a fine lens, but it can't hold a candle to the speed of the L lens.</p>
-
<p>I have the non VC version of this lens and it does make a whining noise when focusing......I found that after using the lens for awhile you don't even notice it. This is one of the best lenses I've ever had, if the VC lens IQ is like mine you will love it. Best, Rich</p>
-
<p>The 28-135 is a nice lens, I had one for a time. For use on a crop sensor camera like my 40D the 28mm wide end is just not enough. I sold it, then purchased a Tamron 17-50 which has turned out to be a superb lens. Other then my telephoto needs for auto racing the Tamron is the only lens I use for general photography and I'm very happy with the results. </p>
-
<p>The Tamron will not work with the 1D, it is just like the EF-S lenses.</p>
-
<p>I started with an XTi and thought it was a very competent camera. Never had an AF issue, the slightly dark viewfinder was never an issue for me. As far as ISO performance goes I shot mostly 400 and under but the few times I bumped up to 800 it seemed OK to me. I've produced numerous 13x19 pics from the XTi that were quite nice. With all that said I sold it and replaced it with a 40D. The most annoying part of the XTi was how easy it was for me to inadvertantly change settings on the camera with all the exposed buttons on the back. I shoot mostly auto racing with some train and railfan work thrown in along with family stuff, when I would move the camera in and out of the bag it seemed that my settings would occasionally get changed and I would shoot a bunch of pics before I realized what happened. The 40D doesn't do this to me, and the other benefits it offers have made this a great choice for me.....frankly, the 40D does everything so well that I wonder why anyone needs any more camera then this. AF performance is lightning fast with fast focusing lenses, I have no problems catching fast moving racing cars at all, IQ is excellent, ISO up to 1600 is fine. The viewfinder is much brighter and the camera is built like a tank. If you can find a good used one or even a new one I'd say its a great upgrade. Best of luck! </p><div></div>
-
<p>I have the Tamron 17-50 and Canon 70-200 F/4 non IS and I can tell you that those lenses are light years ahead of your Sigma 18-200. Adding the Canon 17-85 duplicates what you already have so theres no gain there, seems like a Tamron 17-50, Canon 70-200, and the 50 1.4 that you're getting from your father would cover all your needs and give you much better IQ then what you're getting now with your Sigma.</p>
-
<p>The 70-200 is a far better choice for the second lens. 105mm maximum is not enough for most sports. The 70-200 is my bread and butter lens for my auto racing needs, super fast AF, excellent IQ.....no bag should be without it for the price!</p>
-
<p>I'll also chime in on handholding; A 40D and 70-200 L is a well balanced combo. The lens is relatively light, I handhold all the time and never have an issue whether the subject is moving or still. Also, while the 200 2.8 is a great lens, you give up a lot of versatility that would come in handy trying to photograph kids running around. There is very little to any difference in IQ between them in real world photography.</p>
-
<p>For what you want to use a telephoto for the only choice is the 70-200 L. I had the 70-300 and was generally happy with it until I tried the L lens. The AF is miles ahead on the 70-200, my primary subject is auto racing and the lens never lets me down locking onto fast moving cars. IS is fine for stationary objects but will not change the fact that the 70-300 is a slow focusing lens. IMHO there is no comparison between the 2 in action shooting.</p>
-
<p>Heres a sample of how well the lens handles high speed subjects. The car is moving at approx 130 mph in this shot, 40D set in AF servo, center focal point, ISO 400 as it was overcast that day. Great bokeh in this shot, AF keeps up with just about any motorsport situation I need it for. I've used it at airshows with great success also, all shots handheld......I don't miss IS in my usage as I'm panning with all my subjects anyway, but if you're not steady you get some jitters trying to hold it still. All in all a lens that will never leave my bag.</p><div></div>
-
<p>Even though there is a limited audience for this usage, I'll add that the lens is also fantastic for motorsports, AF is extremely fast, love the bokeh, there's nothing not to love!</p>
Sharpness and Contrast from Crop of 70-200 f/4 L Non-IS vs 55-250 IS
in Canon EOS Mount
Posted
<p>The 55-250 better then the L? Utter rubbish. Check here for a test on it:http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx<br>
I have compared these 2 lenses, AF performance on the IS lens is very slow, contrast is weak, its not as sharp. Someone else said tripod all the way with the L, absolutely not true. IQ of the L lens is far superior, AF performance is lightning fast, this lens is the best bargain in the Canon lineup.</p>