Time to start a new thread for version 3 of this classic lens. I will start out with a recent shot from Hayden Valley in Yellowstone National Park. 160mm at f/8 hand-held on a 5D4. Unadjusted JPEG (except for downsizing and watermark).
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
- Thread starter MrFotoFool
- Start date
Great pictures, Fred. Especially the first one really knocks my socks off. +1000
If someone would ask me about a typical fall photo I'd have something like that in mind. Really great.
Out of curiosity:
Did you spot this one out or was it just by chance that you were there at the right time?
So, much fun with your new gear
Upvote
0
Hayden Valley had mist like this every morning (early at sunrise). We stayed nearby at Canyon Lodge so we spent a couple mornings here, though were disappointed at the lack of wildlife in Hayden Valley and Canyon area (Mammoth would have been a better place to stay for wildlife).Great pictures, Fred. Especially the first one really knocks my socks off. +1000
If someone would ask me about a typical fall photo I'd have something like that in mind. Really great.
Out of curiosity:
Did you spot this one out or was it just by chance that you were there at the right time?
So, much fun with your new gear
When you ask if I saw "this one out" I assume you are talking about the mountain lion? That is a captive animal at one of my two local zoos (Arizona Sonora Desert Museum).
Upvote
0
Thanks, Fred, for your reply.
Sorry for beeing not 100% clear. I was referring to the Hayden Valley mist photo only.
So when I take a landscape photo, I have several approaches, e.g.:
- I am there by chance at the right moment and take the picture. That's most of the time.
- I saw a picture or a friend of mine told me about a good spot and time to go
- I see a sight at the wrong moment but plan to come back when time and light, weather and so on is right.
As I am no native English speaker and reading my text once again I understand that I was easily misunderstood
Upvote
0
Ok, well for Hayden Valley mist it was option one (just happened to see it driving by and stopped for a photo).Thanks, Fred, for your reply.
Sorry for beeing not 100% clear. I was referring to the Hayden Valley mist photo only.
So when I take a landscape photo, I have several approaches, e.g.:
That's what I called "spot out".
- I am there by chance at the right moment and take the picture. That's most of the time.
- I saw a picture or a friend of mine told me about a good spot and time to go
- I see a sight at the wrong moment but plan to come back when time and light, weather and so on is right.
As I am no native English speaker and reading my text once again I understand that I was easily misunderstood
Upvote
0
Surely someone else has this lens? I will post another photo to bump the thread in hopes another version 3 user will appear and post their photos.
Horses below Grand Tetons (September 2018), uncropped and unadjusted JPEG, except for downsizing and watermark.
Canon 5D4, 110mm, 1/800 second, f11, ISO 400.
Horses below Grand Tetons (September 2018), uncropped and unadjusted JPEG, except for downsizing and watermark.
Canon 5D4, 110mm, 1/800 second, f11, ISO 400.
Upvote
0
So I guess I am the only person here who has this lens. From last Sunday's storm at Grand Canyon. These are two camera JPEG's with no adjustments other than downsizing and addition of caption. Focal length was around 185mm (a few mm less on one and more on other) at f9 on a 5D4 with a tripod. This is to show both the lens quality and the improvement with addition of circular polarizer. I used a Heliopan High Transmission Slim SH-PMC (not cheap, but a good investment for landscape photographers).
Upvote
0
Hi Fred!
Both pictures are really nice. Without pixel peeping I honestly see no real differences except for some structures in the clouds.
As the picture without filter had more sunlight in the rock face and also highlights that much better I cannot say what is coming from filter and what from slightly different lighting.
Upvote
0
Do not know. My previous was a 70-200 f4 L is. This is a bit better. I just needed the 2.8.
Upvote
0
Maybe better contrast but probably too small to notice (and certainly not enough difference once images are post processed). If I had version ii I would certainly not change, but I had the original non-IS version so it made sense for me since version iii was not much more money than version ii.
As for difference with polarizing filter, it is increased saturation and contrast. Also thanks to Bundu for adding another photographer to this thread.
As for difference with polarizing filter, it is increased saturation and contrast. Also thanks to Bundu for adding another photographer to this thread.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
