Review of the New 70-200mm f2.8G ED VRII


Status
Not open for further replies.

enchantingmomentz

New Member
Sep 15, 2008
155
0
0
check out this review of the new zoom...

pretty sharp shots hand-held at 1/10th to 1/4th sec is possible! :bigeyes:

and no vignetting wide-open at f2.8 :)

interested? follow the LINK
 

wenbin0215

Senior Member
Dec 26, 2008
515
1
18
Lakeside
anyone interested to buy over my old 70-200? haha! please PM me for more details..
 

ABT

Member
Jan 18, 2002
58
0
6
46
Yishun
Visit site
Been waiting for this one to come :lovegrin:...but I think the price will be :bigeyes:
 

SabaDen

Senior Member
Oct 4, 2006
640
0
16
EastEnders
Very interesting ... hoping for more FX capable lens. Dunno what happened to the 16-35VR.
 

krozby

Member
Apr 6, 2009
212
1
18
so damn razor sharp! ;p
 

dWENZ76

New Member
Aug 2, 2009
91
0
0
I wish I could afford this lens. So damn good.:cool:
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,880
4
0
Looks good in the review!
 

Die Hard

Senior Member
Jun 4, 2007
856
1
18
SGD roughly how much uh?:bsmilie:
Roughly when will reach sg uh?:bsmilie:

Dam excited man!
If Im not wrong with GST between $3700 to $3800. Heard that it will be in by 1st week of Nov. Save for it :bsmilie::thumbsup:
 

luntut

Senior Member
Oct 19, 2007
1,885
0
36
Punggol
at that price, i am going to stick to my old 70-200.

damn. and i thought i might have found something to buy.....
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,904
0
0
UK
Visit site
so damn razor sharp! ;p
How, exactly, do you tell that the lens is so damn razor sharp from those pics? The only one that might tell you anything is the 100% crop and in all honesty, that doesn't look particularly sharp from the middle of the frame.

The original 70-200 is plenty sharp in the middle of the frame too.

I'm not saying the new 70-200 isn't better. It had better be given how poor the current one is. But the guy also praises the current 70-200's ergonomics, and frankly, the ergonomics are poor. Or, pretty ok with one major problem.

I can understand in the days of film why people get impressed with high magnification crops, but these days everyone has a high resolution DSLR and should be getting this kind of results from most lenses in terms of sharpness in the centre. If you're not, then the technique is the problem.

Not to mention most of the shots are circa 600 pixels wide for which you could get sharp shots out of the bottom of a coke bottle. (I am exaggerating slightly, but...)
 

krozby

Member
Apr 6, 2009
212
1
18
How, exactly, do you tell that the lens is so damn razor sharp from those pics? The only one that might tell you anything is the 100% crop and in all honesty, that doesn't look particularly sharp from the middle of the frame.

The original 70-200 is plenty sharp in the middle of the frame too.

I'm not saying the new 70-200 isn't better. It had better be given how poor the current one is. But the guy also praises the current 70-200's ergonomics, and frankly, the ergonomics are poor. Or, pretty ok with one major problem.

I can understand in the days of film why people get impressed with high magnification crops, but these days everyone has a high resolution DSLR and should be getting this kind of results from most lenses in terms of sharpness in the centre. If you're not, then the technique is the problem.

Not to mention most of the shots are circa 600 pixels wide for which you could get sharp shots out of the bottom of a coke bottle. (I am exaggerating slightly, but...)
Simple, center and the corners are sharp compare to the old 70-200 2.8.
Which FF users complains the corners are soft in the wide end. No doubt about the old 70-200 was crisp in the center. Handheld @ 1/10 1/4 is pretty sharp, VRII really kicks in here.. performance and IQ over the ergo thing :bsmilie:
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,904
0
0
UK
Visit site
Simple, center and the corners are sharp compare to the old 70-200 2.8.
My point is, I'm not sure how you figure the corners are sharp from the images on that page.

It's just now loaded some night scene images that weren't there for me before (was only the wedding ones before). But again that's a central crop. He's not provided a corner crop anywhere so you really can't tell how sharp (or not) the lens is from the displayed images.
 

krozby

Member
Apr 6, 2009
212
1
18
My point is, I'm not sure how you figure the corners are sharp from the images on that page.


Sorry man im not just pertaining with the photos in the review.
some articles i read about this lens was enough to convince me.
It was better than the previos 70-200 except for the selling price.


It's just now loaded some night scene images that weren't there for me before (was only the wedding ones before). But again that's a central crop. He's not provided a corner crop anywhere so you really can't tell how sharp (or not) the lens is from the displayed images.
Do you mean those test shots were not sharp enough? :confused: :confused:
 

xintothezonex

New Member
Oct 20, 2008
571
0
0
East Side
at that price, i am going to stick to my old 70-200.

damn. and i thought i might have found something to buy.....
I'm not saying the new 70-200 isn't better. It had better be given how poor the current one is. But the guy also praises the current 70-200's ergonomics, and frankly, the ergonomics are poor. Or, pretty ok with one major problem.
Hey guys.. this is a review in youtube.
Some of you might have seen it but nonetheless just sharing it here.

In the video, the guy mentioned if you dont have the 70-200mm lens then its good for you to buy the new one but if you have the old 70-200mm lens then just keep it..

I have the old 70-200 and im not gonna change or sell it and replace it with the new one.
Might as well I save up for another lens..
Just my opinion.

Cheers!
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,904
0
0
UK
Visit site
Do you mean those test shots were not sharp enough? :confused: :confused:
No those test shots were fine at 800 pixels across. But you can't tell from images that are 800 pixels across. The only two 100% crops that I've seen are taken from the centre of the frame so there's no way you can conclude the corners are great.

Take a look at these two pics. The full version looks sharpish enough. The crop shows you it's nowhere near.



 

xintothezonex

New Member
Oct 20, 2008
571
0
0
East Side
No those test shots were fine at 800 pixels across. But you can't tell from images that are 800 pixels across. The only two 100% crops that I've seen are taken from the centre of the frame so there's no way you can conclude the corners are great.

Take a look at these two pics. The full version looks sharpish enough. The crop shows you it's nowhere near.



im sori..

this pic was taken using the new or the old lens?
 

geeteethree

New Member
Aug 20, 2007
654
0
0
31
im sori..

this pic was taken using the new or the old lens?
you missed the point completely.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.