November 22, 2014, 10:35:14 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - I Simonius

Pages: [1]
1
So... I have   a 5Dmk2 and I can't use it - I see - OK well thanks Canon for nothing  as DPP was too clunky to bother with anyway so as far as software goes canon is still very much in my bad books - do they seriously expect me to upgrade to 5D3 jst to use their software? Why cripple it otherwise?


this is no way to endear me to you, Canon (and that's putting it politely)


2
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 20, 2013, 04:33:24 AM »
Good reply and links - however as we all know the IQ of different copies varies and in real world tests I most definitely found the with the 70-200 I have and the 135 I had the zoom definitely outperformed the 135. No question. In fact the 135 wide open was downright dissappointing (for the 135)

3
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 18, 2013, 04:27:17 AM »
I entirely concur with the review.

I have previously owned the F4 (with and without IS) and the 2.8 versions of this zoom and can say unequivocally that this lens is noticeably better in every regard, image-quality-wise, to those other zooms. Its one major drawback is the weight. You will notice it if carrying for any length of time.

Image-wise, it is IMO significantly better then any other lens in the same focal range with the possible exception of the 200 f2. So yes , it is better than the 135 that I had, except of course it is no where near as inconspicuous as the 135. The only portrait lens I have had that had a 'better' image quality was the 85 f1.2, where the bokeh is truly creamy and beautiful, but that lens only outdoes this one when fully open and is only useful for static subjects as the 1.2 lens' focussing is horribly slow, whereas the 2.8 zoom is fast and crisp, and has better IQ when stopped down than the 1.2 (which while contrasty doesn't have the same resolving power)

The IS on this lens is phenomenal, I have perfectly sharp test images hand held at 1/4 second.

However, because of it's weight I never take it when landscape shooting (which is exclusively what I do nowadays) and because of its size and colour it's no good if you're trying to be inconspicuous. 

For Indoor sports (like martial arts) and portraits and wedding type events is it far and away the best zoom lens there is for the ultimate IQ .

 I bought mine purely for my daughter's wedding but due to it's weight haven't used it since, so if, like me, you no longer shoot weddings, portrait etc and have a bad back, I'd think twice about getting it. I'll be reluctantly selling mine just because if the weight, but I find it hard to let go of, as I've never had a zoom as sharp.

For landscapes, if you want this sort of resolving power, be prepared to cary some weight for the day. (although longer FL lenses are heavier still ;))

So, for portraits, especially weddings, and sports this zoom cannot be matched.

Pages: [1]