| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/30/2005 11:09:22 AM · #1 |
Ok here are the two lenses:
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 EF IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens
1.)Do you think it is possible to get as sharp an image at 200mm with the L lens without the IS as you would get at 300mm or 200mm using the IS. Both HAND HELD.
2.)How much more distance can you get with a 300mm vs a 200mm
|
|
|
|
04/30/2005 11:14:41 AM · #2 |
As for your first question...no. That's why people buy the IS, to get an extra couple of stops in low light. You can handhold a 200mm shot at 1/125s and get decent results but with IS you could take that same shot at about 1/30s with similar results. Or you could take it at 1/125s but bringing the ISO from 1600 to 400. It's clearly an advantage if you shoot a lot of low light. The question is, is it worth the price?
Message edited by author 2005-04-30 11:15:17.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2005 11:22:34 AM · #3 |
In comparing these two lenses, however, a couple things need to be recognized:
- The 75-300 is nowhere near as sharp a lens as the 70-200 f/4
- The 75-300 is one stop slower at the telephoto end, negating half the benefit of the IS
The 75-300 does of course have more reach, and the IS will enable shots in a bit lower light at the long end, even considering the 1-stop penalty in aperture. Personally, I'd strongly prefer the 70-200 f/4 out of these two options, even though I really like IS.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2005 11:33:52 AM · #4 |
70-200mm f/4L no question. Best value for money.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2005 12:22:10 PM · #5 |
Ok but how much reach would I lose by going from the 300 to the 200.
I also like the IS and reach but I find the photos are way to soft. I just bought the IS and am thinking of returning for the 200,,f4L
Message edited by author 2005-04-30 12:25:46. |
|
|
|
04/30/2005 12:25:08 PM · #6 |
reach difference
 |
|
|
|
04/30/2005 12:38:09 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by hopper:
reach difference
|
wow I need me a 600mm in a bad way :-D
|
|
|
|
04/30/2005 12:39:26 PM · #8 |
| A 1.4x teleconverter will get you most of the way to 300mm, and still retain sharpness. You will lose a stop, though. |
|
|
|
04/30/2005 01:08:04 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
A 1.4x teleconverter will get you most of the way to 300mm, and still retain sharpness. You will lose a stop, though. |
I have found 200 is not enough for wildlife, or even crew races on the river. I don't even think 300 is enough.
Yes, a teleconverter gets you almost to 300, but the teleconverter costs something like $300! Maybe for $100... And then your walking around low end is even higher, 100 or so, which is 160 or so in 35mm focal lengths (at least without stopping to remove the teleconverter).
And then you don't have IS for the long 300 end.
So, at least for me, I ordered the Canon EF 70 - 300 mm DO IS USM, for about $1000. Shorter than the 70-200, it gets reviews that it has a sharpness between a regular Canon IS zoom and a L lens. (But it does carry an L lens price.) But to me that's the price of a lens which is convenient enough to leave in your bag.
My only wish was that it was 70-400 instead! They'll probably release a 70-450 IS DO F4.0-5.6 just as I get my lens in the mail TOBAL.
Kris--that's a useful shot for seeing the difference!
Message edited by author 2005-04-30 13:08:39. |
|
|
|
05/01/2005 12:28:52 AM · #10 |
In my experience, for wildlife, nothing under 300 is enough (sometimes you'll be lucky, but most times you'll find yourself out of reach). Get either the best quality 300 you can afford, so you can shoot to crop, or buy a longer lens with IS (or get used to shooting with a tripod). I've found that teleconverters are generally more trouble than they're worth, do lose you a noticeable amount of quality, not to mention the loss of aperture that often results in unusable autofocus on narrower lenses...
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/16/2025 03:56:01 PM EDT.
