New lens on it's way - DPChallenge Forums

11/07/2007 08:25:31 AM · #3

Nice, congrats! You'll love that lens! Maybe use some of that savings for flowers... one bouquet for your wife and one for your Mother-in-law.

Then, when you give them to them, tell them how much their support means to you... blah blah blah. Sets a good foundation for further purchases. ;-)

11/07/2007 08:35:29 AM · #4

Originally posted by jjared:

About a month ago a friend let me borrow his Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens for a weekend.

Ive been eyeing this lens myself but it seemed to get mediocre reviews. The F/4 variant sems to offer better images. Was it just the speed that made you chose the f/2.8 over the f/4?

Simms

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

11/07/2007 08:45:05 AM · #5

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by jjared:
About a month ago a friend let me borrow his Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens for a weekend.

Ive been eyeing this lens myself but it seemed to get mediocre reviews. The F/4 variant sems to offer better images. Was it just the speed that made you chose the f/2.8 over the f/4?

Mediocre reviews? Would love to see them, this lens is possibly the best lens in its class without a doubt. I have used the f4, the f4IS, the f2.8 and the f2.8 IS, and whilst the f2.8 non IS is slightly sharper (hardly noticable though) the f2.8IS is the most versatile. The only real downside is the weight of the thing, but thats about it.

Apple iPhone 5

11/07/2007 08:52:23 AM · #6

Congrats on getting your mother-in-law on your side. ;-)

11/07/2007 09:36:03 AM · #7

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by jjared:
About a month ago a friend let me borrow his Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens for a weekend.

Ive been eyeing this lens myself but it seemed to get mediocre reviews.

Reviews on what planet?

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

11/07/2007 09:53:26 AM · #8

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by jjared:
About a month ago a friend let me borrow his Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens for a weekend.

Ive been eyeing this lens myself but it seemed to get mediocre reviews.

Reviews on what planet?

I was going to say the same thing but I'm trying to cut down on the snarkiness.

Ubersteiny

Sigma 35mm f1.4 dg hsm for Canon

11/07/2007 10:03:16 AM · #9

Originally posted by Kaveran:

..you so crazzzyyyyy

figaro

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

11/07/2007 10:07:58 AM · #10

I imagine he is referring to this one which isn't brilliantly complimentary.

Photozone are normally pretty good but I've heard enough good things about this lens to get one if I suddenly come into vast amounts of money!

11/07/2007 10:08:31 AM · #11

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by jjared:
About a month ago a friend let me borrow his Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens for a weekend.

Ive been eyeing this lens myself but it seemed to get mediocre reviews.

Reviews on what planet?

I was going to say the same thing but I'm trying to cut down on the snarkiness.

Well, I was trying to cut back on snarkiness too, but since I'm already trying to follow the doctor's orders to cut back on caffeine, I'm tired and crabby and I have a continual throbbing headache. All of which increase my need to be snarky. I'm left with a difficult choice: Do I sacrifice my heath and drink more coffee and become less snarky or do I follow my Doc's advice and be as snarky as ever?

Message edited by author 2007-11-07 10:09:36.

11/07/2007 10:37:59 AM · #12

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Mediocre is of course realative and I should have been more specific. I was specifically refering to how it compared to the f/4.

11/07/2007 10:42:32 AM · #13

Originally posted by figaro:

At least someone was able to understand I was comparing the f/2.8 to the f/4.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

11/07/2007 10:50:54 AM · #14

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by figaro:
I imagine he is referring to this one which isn't brilliantly complimentary.

Photozone are normally pretty good but I've heard enough good things about this lens to get one if I suddenly come into vast amounts of money!

At least someone was able to understand I was comparing the f/2.8 to the f/4.

Let's put it this way, I would not let the 'not a good match for teleconverters' complaint of that review disuade you from buying the lens. I've owned both, image quality is identical. 2.8, dual mode IS, and being tack sharp while still at a relatively large aperture are certainly benefits of the 2.8.

11/07/2007 10:54:27 AM · #15

Originally posted by routerguy666:

That wasnt a concern at all. I was just looking at the basics. f/4 with better resolution, about $400 cheaper, better image quality at the long end etc. The only benefit I see from the 2.8 version is the speed. I was just curious why the OP chose to go with the 2.8 over the 4. Didnt realize so many people would get so worked up.

11/07/2007 10:56:31 AM · #16

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by jjared:
About a month ago a friend let me borrow his Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens for a weekend.

Ive been eyeing this lens myself but it seemed to get mediocre reviews.

Reviews on what planet?

Mediocre is of course realative and I should have been more specific. I was specifically refering to how it compared to the f/4.

It compares most favorably at f2.8, wouldn't you say?

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

11/07/2007 11:07:24 AM · #17

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by routerguy666:
Let's put it this way, I would not let the 'not a good match for teleconverters' complaint of that review disuade you from buying the lens. I've owned both, image quality is identical. 2.8, dual mode IS, and being tack sharp while still at a relatively large aperture are certainly benefits of the 2.8.

That wasnt a concern at all. I was just looking at the basics. f/4 with better resolution, about $400 cheaper, better image quality at the long end etc. The only benefit I see from the 2.8 version is the speed. I was just curious why the OP chose to go with the 2.8 over the 4. Didnt realize so many people would get so worked up.

No one is worked up, it's just a funny conclusion to draw on those lenses. Photozone is a good site, but the feedback from people using both lenses in real situations is probably better to rely on.

You should also consider that photozone tested that on a 350D and that one other big bonus of the 2.8 lens is that it will activate extra auto-focus sensors on cameras (though not the 350...). For 400 bucks, it is well worth it for the extras you get.

11/07/2007 11:17:10 AM · #18

Originally posted by Kaveran:

I don't think anyone's "worked up".

There are certainly differences between the f2.8 and the f4 lenses and each has its pros and cons. None of them would really qualify either lens as "mediocre".

11/07/2007 11:20:38 AM · #19

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

None of them would really qualify either lens as "mediocre".

Thanks for the vocabulary lesson.

11/07/2007 11:22:55 AM · #20

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
None of them would really qualify either lens as "mediocre".

Thanks for the vocabulary lesson.

You're welcome.

brownsm

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

11/07/2007 11:32:23 AM · #21

I've also owned both the f4 and f2.8 versions (both non-IS). I loved the f4 version, but sold it to get a longer reach lens (Sigma 80-400 OS). That lens was also nice, but found I wanted a faster lens, not slower. So, I sold the Sigma to get the Canon f2.8. And I absolutely love it! Both versions give excellent color reproduction, and are amazingly sharp. For me, the extra speed was worth the extra money. I can shoot sports much better (shallower DOF which helps blur the annoying backgrounds). I regularly shoot wide-open and the images are incredibly sharp. I would highly recommend this lens to anyone at any time. You will not be disappointed.

NstiG8tr

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

11/07/2007 11:32:29 AM · #22

Originally posted by figaro:

Why would somebody take a $1600 "L" lens and do a review on it attached to a 350 anyway?

Ubersteiny

Sigma 35mm f1.4 dg hsm for Canon

11/07/2007 02:34:22 PM · #23

Originally posted by Kaveran:

the f/4 doesnt have better res. than the f/2.8.....

kleffman

Olympus E-500 EVOLT

Olympus 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital ED

11/07/2007 03:07:29 PM · #24

all arguments aside, congrats on the new lens...I just got the olympus 50-200 f/2.8 and it's unreal.

AdrlnJunkie11