DPReview has just posted its studio test for the Nikon D3200. As we predicted, the Nikon D3200 has identical performance to that of the Sony NEX-7.
Monday, 30 April 2012
Every Nikon shooter knows that the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G is the best standard zoom for Nikon's full frame cameras. However, at around $1900, it's not easily affordable. There are of course third-party standard zooms that cost far less, such as from Sigma, Tamron and Tokina, but their performance is not quite as good as that of the Nikkor 24-70.
One alternative that some newer Nikon shooters might not know about is the predecessor to the 24-70, the Nikkor 28-70 2.8D. It is no longer being sold new, but used prices are about half the price of the 24-70.
But is the 28-70 as good as the 24-70? In this post, I compare the 28-70 to the 24-70 and let you judge for yourself.
ABOUT THE 28-70
The 28-70 is the first high-end Nikon lens I've owned. It is an all-metal lens and feels substantial. I don't own an 85 1.4D, but that's what it reminded me of. It feels like you're holding an expensive watch.
The 28-70 usually comes in black like the one pictured above but there is also a white version:
The 28-70 is sometimes called 'the Beast' because of its size and weight, a name that I don't think it truly deserves, because it's only slightly wider, a little shorter, and just 35 grams heavier than the 24-70. There are some people who talk about it being too heavy. I think they're whining like a bunch of little kittens.
Quick rundown of the 28-70's features:
Both the 28-70 and 24-70 have 15 elements in 11 groups, except that the 24-70 has 3 aspherical elements whereas the 28-70 has one. Both have a 9 bladed diaphragm for rounder bokeh.
There are some differences in features, however. The 24-70 has Nikon's nano crystal coating to minimize ghosting and flare. The 24-70 also has dust/weather-sealing. Finally, the 24-70 has a much closer minimum focus distance (15 inches vs. 27.6 inches).
Included accessories:
The 28-70 comes with a petal-shaped lens hood (HB-19) and a leatherette hard case (Nikon CL-74).
On with the shootout...
28-70 vs. 24-70: TEST PROTOCOL
I took the two lenses, mounted them alternately on a D3 on a tripod aimed at a brick wall. I took shots at 70mm, 35mm, 28mm (and in the case of the 24-70, at 24mm as well). Each focal length was taken at f/2.8, f/4.0 and f/5.6.
To compare the results, I took 100% crops from the center and from the upper left corner area (not literally the corner though). This is what the uncropped shot at 28mm looks like:
Disclaimer: the 28-70 had the benefit of a microfocus adjustment. The 24-70 here did not.
The 28-70 is the first high-end Nikon lens I've owned. It is an all-metal lens and feels substantial. I don't own an 85 1.4D, but that's what it reminded me of. It feels like you're holding an expensive watch.
The 28-70 usually comes in black like the one pictured above but there is also a white version:
 |
| image courtesy of Nikon |
The 28-70 is sometimes called 'the Beast' because of its size and weight, a name that I don't think it truly deserves, because it's only slightly wider, a little shorter, and just 35 grams heavier than the 24-70. There are some people who talk about it being too heavy. I think they're whining like a bunch of little kittens.
 |
| The 28-70 on a D3 beside a Tamron 17-50 VC on a D70 |
- Full frame FX lens - can be used on both full frame FX and APS-C DX bodies. On a full frame, it's a standard fast zoom. On a DX body, it covers 42-105, which is like having both a normal lens and a portrait lens with you, but no wide angle coverage.
- Constant f/2.8 aperture
- ED glass: Extra-low dispersion glass minimizes chromatic aberrations.
- SWM (silent wave motor): as an AF-S lens, the 28-70 has a silent wave motor, which allows it to focus quickly and accurately, even on smaller Nikon bodies without a built-in AF motor
- SIC super integrated coating - reduces ghosting and flare
- M/A switch - allows quick switching from autofocus to manual focus
- aperture ring - as a D lens, the 28-70 has an aperture ring, which can be used to change aperture on the fly for video, adjusting aperture on older cameras, or for macro (for example, if used with a reversing ring).
Both the 28-70 and 24-70 have 15 elements in 11 groups, except that the 24-70 has 3 aspherical elements whereas the 28-70 has one. Both have a 9 bladed diaphragm for rounder bokeh.
There are some differences in features, however. The 24-70 has Nikon's nano crystal coating to minimize ghosting and flare. The 24-70 also has dust/weather-sealing. Finally, the 24-70 has a much closer minimum focus distance (15 inches vs. 27.6 inches).
Included accessories:
The 28-70 comes with a petal-shaped lens hood (HB-19) and a leatherette hard case (Nikon CL-74).
On with the shootout...
28-70 vs. 24-70: TEST PROTOCOL
I took the two lenses, mounted them alternately on a D3 on a tripod aimed at a brick wall. I took shots at 70mm, 35mm, 28mm (and in the case of the 24-70, at 24mm as well). Each focal length was taken at f/2.8, f/4.0 and f/5.6.
To compare the results, I took 100% crops from the center and from the upper left corner area (not literally the corner though). This is what the uncropped shot at 28mm looks like:
Disclaimer: the 28-70 had the benefit of a microfocus adjustment. The 24-70 here did not.
100% CROP FROM CENTER
In the slideshow below, you'll see the 28-70 shot first, then the equivalent shot from the 24-70. If you prefer, you can click on the link to launch the album where you can view the pictures larger.
In the slideshow below, you'll see the 28-70 shot first, then the equivalent shot from the 24-70. If you prefer, you can click on the link to launch the album where you can view the pictures larger.
100% CROP FROM CORNER
The slideshow below is similar to the one above, except these crops are taken from top left corners of the same shots. Web album here.
In my opinion, the 28-70 holds its own against the significantly more expensive 24-70, at least at the D3's 12 megapixel resolution. [EDIT: But see the comments below for the performance on a D800.] The 24-70 has a warmer color rendition, but otherwise it's hard to tell them apart unless they're side-by-side, and I'm pixel peeping really closely.
CONCLUSION
If you are looking for a more affordable alternative to the Nikon 24-70 2.8G, this is it. Together with the 24-70, this is Nikon's best standard zoom with virtually the same sharpness, yet it costs almost half as much as the 24-70. Personally, I sold mine, but only because I found a good deal on the 24-70 and I wanted the peace of mind of having the absolute best lens for a focal range that I use very often, in case I ever upgrade to a higher resolution body.
Coming up: A review of the Tamron 28-105 f/2.8, the only lens that covers 28-105 at a constant 2.8 aperture. I will also be reviewing the Nikon 24-70 briefly, followed by the Sigma 50 1.4. We'll switch to wide angles again with the Tokina 11-16 2.8 and the Tokina 10-17 fisheye. Then we'll go to the opposite end with a review of the Nikon 70-200 VR I.
OTHER COMPARISONS BETWEEN 28-70 AND 24-70
- Ken Rockwell's review of the 28-70 here. Side-by-side comparisons (together with other standard zooms) here.
- Comparison by Utopia Photography
- a Nikonland user's comparison (Italian)
- Just for kicks: Nikkor 28-70 vs Canon 24-70 2.8L (French)
28-70 SAMPLE SHOTS
 |
| 28mm at 2.8 |
 |
| 48mm at 2.8 |
 |
| 28mm at 4.0 |
 |
| Scissor sweep. 70mm at f/4.5 |
 |
| My professor, teaching the s-mount armbar. 50mm at 4.0 |
 |
| 28mm at 4.0 |
 |
| 38mm at 2.8 |
Thursday, 26 April 2012
EDIT: Leaked photos of the D600 here. It does indeed look pretty much like a D7000 with FX sensor.
Nikon Rumors reported a rumor about the possible release by Nikon of an entry-level full frame camera, called the Nikon D600, perhaps as early as this summer. I'd like to give my predictions about the specs of that camera.
I predict the D600 will have the same 16-megapixel sensor as the Nikon D4. This is logical because it would allow Nikon to recoup their investment in the development of the D4 sensor (the D4 is of course not a high volume product). This would mean the high ISO performance is better than that of the D3 (at a higher resolution) though not quite as good as that of the D3S.
Given that this is a higher-end model than the D7000, its specs are at least as good as the D7000 in almost all (if not all) respects, therefore I expect the following:
- At least 39 AF points.
- 100% viewfinder.
- Dual memory cards.
- 1080p 30fps, like the D3200.
- pop-up flash with built-in commander
To differentiate the D600 from the D4, it would have to miss some features:
- Shutter rated at 150,000 cycles instead of 200,000 (D800) or 400,000 (D4).
- Continuous shooting speed far less than that of the D4. Probably 4fps or less.
- Metering may be similar to the 2016-pixel RGB sensor in the D7000 instead of the 91k pixel of the D4 and D800.
- No AF-ON button.
- SD cards instead of CF cards. Most professional cameras use CF cards. By using SD cards, Nikon could discourage professionals from using this camera.
- No PC sync.
- No ethernet capabilities.
Essentially, it's like a D7000 with a D4 sensor. It may also be compatible with the WU-1a wireless adapter.
As for price, it will cost $2200, the same as the D700 after the price drop (the D700 will officially be phased out). There will be a kit lens included for around $2500, the 24-70 3.5-4.5 lens for which Nikon filed a patent.
Nikon Rumors reported a rumor about the possible release by Nikon of an entry-level full frame camera, called the Nikon D600, perhaps as early as this summer. I'd like to give my predictions about the specs of that camera.
I predict the D600 will have the same 16-megapixel sensor as the Nikon D4. This is logical because it would allow Nikon to recoup their investment in the development of the D4 sensor (the D4 is of course not a high volume product). This would mean the high ISO performance is better than that of the D3 (at a higher resolution) though not quite as good as that of the D3S.
Given that this is a higher-end model than the D7000, its specs are at least as good as the D7000 in almost all (if not all) respects, therefore I expect the following:
- At least 39 AF points.
- 100% viewfinder.
- Dual memory cards.
- 1080p 30fps, like the D3200.
- pop-up flash with built-in commander
To differentiate the D600 from the D4, it would have to miss some features:
- Shutter rated at 150,000 cycles instead of 200,000 (D800) or 400,000 (D4).
- Continuous shooting speed far less than that of the D4. Probably 4fps or less.
- Metering may be similar to the 2016-pixel RGB sensor in the D7000 instead of the 91k pixel of the D4 and D800.
- No AF-ON button.
- SD cards instead of CF cards. Most professional cameras use CF cards. By using SD cards, Nikon could discourage professionals from using this camera.
- No PC sync.
- No ethernet capabilities.
Essentially, it's like a D7000 with a D4 sensor. It may also be compatible with the WU-1a wireless adapter.
As for price, it will cost $2200, the same as the D700 after the price drop (the D700 will officially be phased out). There will be a kit lens included for around $2500, the 24-70 3.5-4.5 lens for which Nikon filed a patent.
Wednesday, 25 April 2012
This is a review of two camera straps:
- The first is a double camera strap that's -- let's be blunt -- a knockoff of the BlackRapid RS DR-1 Double Camera Strap. This clone is by RainbowImaging and I bought it from Amazon.
- The second is the BlackRapid RS-5.
More after the jump.
THE PROBLEM
I like to shoot with two cameras for maximum versatility. It's great because I can cover two focal length ranges (e.g. a standard zoom and a telephoto zoom) without having to switch lenses. However, when I shoot with one camera on each shoulder, I find that my second camera tends to slip off my shoulder as I'm shooting with my first camera. Sometimes I just use the Lowepro Slingshot 302 which allows me to switch between cameras but it's nowhere near as fast as having a camera on each shoulder.
THE SOLUTION
My co-author MShafik loves his BlackRapid RS-5 camera strap (reviewed below), which got me curious about it. I had heard of the BlackRapid but didn't understand how it was functionally different from a regular camera strap. It also seemed expensive too for what it is, so I never got one but kept it in mind.
When I was selecting a dual camera support system, I remembered the BlackRapid and saw that they had a dual-camera version, but I was still nervous about spending so much money on something that I wasn't sure would work well for me. I found a fairly inexpensive version by RainbowImaging on Amazon and got that one instead.
When I tried the double strap, I learned first of all how the BlackRapid-style straps differed from regular camera straps: a camera strap usually has a non-slip padding which prevents it from slipping but also makes it a little harder to swing the camera immediately to shooting position. I have used one strap that was non-slip and was easier to shoot quickly with, but it also had a tendency to slip off my shoulder. BlackRapid's innovation was to use a strap that allows the camera to slide easily along the strap using a carabiner-like attachment, with the camera suspended upside down from its tripod mount. The idea worked very well, hence the many other similar products now in the market.
The double strap version is a logical extension of the original strap, simply connecting two single straps. It's worn like a backpack, and can be adjusted for length.
Along the straps are two swiveling carabiners that slide easily along the ballistic nylon strap. The camera is attached to a plate that is secured to the camera's tripod mount with a thumbscrew. Once the camera is attached to the plate, the plate is hooked into the carabiner.
There is also a small sliding clamp (not shown here) to limit the sliding range of the carabiner. In the original BlackRapid, there are two clamps for each strap - one in front and one behind. In this RainbowImaging strap, there is only one clamp per strap, in front of the carabiner.
Here's how the strap looks with a standard zoom and telephoto zoom. I like that the setup looks inconspicuous, at least from the front.
HOW WELL DOES IT WORK?
I've found that the product works pretty much as advertised. I have to take the time to attach the attachment plates to the camera every time because it's hard to store the cameras in my bag with the plates left attached. However, once the plates are attached, it's quick to hook the cameras up to the straps with the carabiner.
The strap works well when carrying the cameras around. Unlike having a camera strap on each shoulder, I don't have to be conscious about my cameras slipping off the shoulder, and I don't need to keep adjusting the camera strap.
When I shoot, I can reach for either camera very easily and quickly bring them up to my eye. It's definitely faster than a regular camera strap. For cameras with a portrait/battery grip, the attachment plate and thumbscrew do make it a little harder to hold the grip. I'm ok with it, but I can see how someone with smaller hands may find it a problem.
One feature I like is that the camera straps can be separated into two single straps.
 |
| The dual strap can be separated into two single straps. In this shot, you can also see the small clamp that controls the sliding range of the carabiner. |
 |
| Single strap mode (excuse the bad image quality - I was too tired to re-do the shot) |
Although this is a knockoff, the quality of the strap itself is not too bad. The padding thickness feels similar to those of the padded straps on my
About the attachment plate, it appears to be the only thing that is significantly different between that of this product and the BlackRapid. On the BlackRapid, the connectors (called FastenR-3) are small nubs. On the other hand, this strap uses attachment plates that are each about twice as wide as small quick release plates for tripods. The attachment plates have a rubber pad on them and are secured to the tripod with thumbscrews.
One advantage of the BlackRapid is that when the camera is used with a portrait grip, the small FastenR-3 nubs appear to be less intrusive. The BlackRapid FastenR-3 is also made of stainless steel whereas the attachment plates here seem to be made of a lighter metal or alloy (possibly aluminum).
You can buy the FastenR-3 separately (actually there are knockoffs of it on Amazon) and use it with the RainbowImaging strap but I'm not sure if it's really better because the attachment plate has a wider surface, so it would seem that it can grip the camera better (thus making it less likely to be accidentally loosened). When using this product, I haven't found the plates to have loosened.
Another advantage of the attachment plates is that the thumbscrew for the plate has a tripod mount itself, therefore it's possible to mount your camera on a tripod without having to remove the plate. In practice, I've found that it works ok from landscape orientation but not portrait orientation (the camera tends to droop).
Summary of the most significant differences from BlackRapid:
- One stopper per strap vs. two for BlackRapid.
- Camera attachment is different.
- BlackRapid has several accessories.
CONCLUSION
A double camera strap is the best solution I've found for carrying and shooting quickly with two cameras. Usually, copies of the original don't work nearly as well but in this particular case, without a direct side-by-side comparison against the BlackRapid, I don't see any functional problems with the RainbowImaging. It might even have a better attachment system in my opinion. If you don't mind using a knockoff instead of the original product, the RainbowImaging dual strap works.
You may also want to consider these alternatives:
1. BlackRapid RS DR-1 Double Camera Strap - from the company that started it all. If I get paid for photography and I'm very conscious of my client's perceptions, this is probably what I would get.
2. Dual Camera Harness by Op/Tech - uses slightly different design where the camera is suspended from one point and slides from another.
3. SunSniper by California Sunbounce - Their strap has steel reinforcement to prevent theft and they have several accessories such as a backpack for their strap.
4. CS-Double 2 Camera Strap by Carry Speed - the design seems similar to BlackRapid. Uses attachment plates like the RainbowImaging. One difference is that they have an optional attachment to the camera that looks very robust. They have some accessories.
5. CF-FS Double Camera Strap by Cameraslingers - again similar to BlackRapid but without a chest strap. Video review by Cameratown here.
6. Double Shoulder Belt Strap by Neewer - a BlackRapid knockoff. Looks completely identical to the RainbowImaging except for the logo. Slightly lower price at the time of this writing. Cheapest dual strap that I'm aware of.
DISCLOSURE
This is an independent review and I wasn't compensated by any company for doing this review. I bought the product for myself at full retail price with my money and this is my honest opinion. If you would like to support this blog (and am very grateful for those who have), please consider buying from the links in this post and elsewhere in the blog. Sometimes I receive a small commission but in any case, it won't change your price at all. It's a way for you to help us without any cost out of your pocket.
UPDATE (mshafik here):
Mic has made a great review of the double-strap, but since he has mentioned the BlackRapid, I thought I'd chime in here instead of doing a separate review.
The BlackRapid RS-5 has one main difference than the one mentioned here (and that's also the difference between it and the RS-7 version), it has pockets, three useful pockets for carrying small stuff like extra batteries, memory cards, flash gels, white balance cards, etc... Below is a quick pictorial of the RS-5, followed by a video showing exactly the main idea behind the strap.
My only personal comments are:
- It is well padded and very comfortable for long periods
- Having the camera turned on and ready at your side all the time is great when you're walking around shooting randomly, compared to putting the camera away in a bag after each shot, or having it hanging to your neck with the default crap strap (never ever used a single one on any of the four Canons I owned).
- The pockets are great for carrying some cash, credit cards, a spare battery and some memory cards.
- The fastener is very strong, it has this rubber at the bottom that when compressed makes the connection very strong. An official tip from BlackRapid is that you should moist this piece of rubber (few water drops) to make sure it won't ever get loose.
- My only issue is that you can't set the camera down on a table with the fastener at the bottom, you have to remove it first, or do like me, just put the camera on a soft couch or a bed.
- Of course you can't mount the camera to a tripod unless you remove the fastener first, some people work around this by attaching the strap to the tripod's quick release plate. DON'T EVER DO THAT, it is not designed to carry that load, you are risking a few thousand dollars worth of equipment to fall crashing to the ground by doing that. That's why BlackRapid stopped using the two-piece FastenR-2 and replaced it with the one-piece FastenR-3.
- However if you have a Manfrotto quic release plate and $18 to spare, BlackRapid has a solution for you, the FastenR-T1, actually it's the first time I see it now and I will get one for myself.
 |
| Here's the Manfrotto quick release plate that people use, DON'T! |
 |
| Carrying pouch for the RS-5, can be used for lots of other things. |
 |
| BlackRapid RS-5 |
 |
| FastenR-3 |
 |
| FastenR-3, rubber piece |
 |
| FastenR-3 mounted to the camera |
 |
| Outer pocket, uses a strong magnet latch, fits a modern mobile phone |
 |
| Same pocket open |
 |
| One of the two internal pockets, this is the short one |
 |
| The other internal pocket, the long one |
 |
| The whole strap to illustrate the pockets |
And here's a video showing the setup and operation of the RS-5 strap:
Sunday, 22 April 2012
 |
| Canon 200mm f/2.8L II - Canon 5D Mark II |
Now that I have got myself a full frame camera, I needed new lenses since my EF-S lenses can only be used on APS-C sensors. So what lenses did I choose? And why? Hit the jump to read more.
P.S. There is a lot of non-200mm related rambling going next, so if you want to jump to the review directly you'll find it at the end, oh, and you can click on pictures to see a 1200px version.
APS-C LENSES HISTORY
I have used my fair share of lenses with the 550D and the 60D, so I will give you quick summary first, then I will tell you about the focal lengths that I wanted with the 5D Mark II, and how I covered them.
Canon EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS: the kit lens that I received with the 550D, arguably, a very good value for money, but I didn't like the range, the sharpness, and the non-USM rotating-front-element auto focus. It was quickly replaced with the 15-85mm.
Canon EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM: one of the two best general purpose lenses for APS-C, it was either this one or the 17-55mm f/2.8, I chose this one for the wider + longer range and the newer IS (several reports that the 17-55mm IS system broke-down after a while), this was my walk-around lens, and I got some excellent super sharp pictures with it, but I always hated the strong distortion at the wide end. This was my first lens with the fast and silent USM and FTM (Full Time Manual Focusing), I didn't want to use lenses without it anymore. The one thing that bugged me with this lens is the zoom creep, unless it was fully zoomed out, once it is pointed downwards, it will zoom under it's own weight, this rendered it useless on a tripod pointed at a downwards angle.
Canon EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS: again, one of the best value-for-money lenses out there, it covered a huge 35mm equivalent range of 88mm - 400mm, and with image stabilization, I got sharp pictures at the long end at 1/25 sec. I always wanted to upgrade to a more sharper lens, but never got to do it because the 55-250 was already pretty good, small and not expensive, and any upgrade options were quite expensive and large. One more thing, I didn't use this lens a lot, mainly because of the sharpness, I always preferred one of the primes.
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II: small, plastic (not the expensive plastic, no, the cheap one), noisy inconsistent AF, very cheap, and very sharp. I bought this lens after the 18-55 and the 55-250, it was my first prime lens, and I was amazed with how sharp it was compared to my zoom lenses, and it allowed me to get a shallow DoF with the fast aperture, and shoot in low light situations. It was quite sharp from f/2.8, but any wider than that and the focus was too inconsistent to get a sharp picture. On a crop sensor it is quite long for indoor use. I loved this lens but decided to get rid of it and buy the 60 macro instead with a relatively similar focal length.
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM: best-lens-ever, super sharp (and I don't mean regular sharp, no, crazy sharp), fast focusing, excellent focal length (in my opinion) for portraits on a crop sensor (96mm), very small, and best of all, can be used as a true macro lens. My last shoot with the 60D was done with this lens, and they were some of the best pictures I took, the sharpness of this lens, coupled with a shallow DoF makes portraits and photos really pop, add to that the excellent contrast and color, and you have a bargain. It was the only lens I really regretted selling.
Canon EF 35mm f/2: a very good and underrated lens, good build quality, good price, buzzy AF (but accurate), and most importantly, the perfect focal length on a crop sensor (54mm), if you check my review, you'll know how much I enjoyed this focal length. If one thing, I wished I could replace it with the 35mm f/1.4. This was my first lens with a clip-on lens hood, I hated that lens hood.
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM: at the beginning, I wasn't convinced of this focal length on a crop sensor, but the more experience I got, the more I discovered that I enjoyed shooting long focal lengths (I mainly shoot portraits), this and the reviews talking about creamy bokeh made me lust for the shallow DoF and the creamy backgrounds. So I got one, my first test shot left me underwhelmed, and my first daylight portrait wide-open scared me to death with severe purple fringing, but with time I got the hang of it, and learned how to get the best out of this lens and enjoyed it a lot. The lens is sharp even wide open, but no where as sharp as the 60 macro, even when stopped down to the same aperture. It features the same stupid clip-on lens hood, but somehow they managed to make it flimsier than the 35mm's one.
DECIDING ON FULL FRAME LENSES
Now you know about the lenses I owned. My previous lens collection covered a broad range from 24mm to 400mm, with a few fast primes and a macro. The primes were my favorites, and when I went to shoot, I usually picked just one prime and went shooting enjoying the limited focal length that made me concentrate more in the shooting process.
Initially, I decided to go for a prime-only system for image quality and bank account reasons. I had the 35mm f/2 and the 85mm f1.8, one would act as a wide angle, and the other one as a fast portrait lens, add to that a 50mm f/1.4 and it was a good starting point, then I would slowly add longer and wider lenses, I was initially set at the 17-40 f/4, or at least that's what I thought.
Not having a walkaround zoom covering a wide to semi-telephoto made me nervous, there were situations when I went for several days shooting only with the 15-85, so when I saw Syl Arena's tweet about how sharp the 24-105 was, I started reading reviews about it and decided that I would get it, it was my first L lens. I got myself the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and sold the 35mm f/2 because it was too wide for my taste on the 5D2. Back then I only had the 24-105, the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8. So why did I choose the 200mm f/2.8?
CANON 200 f/2.8L II CHOICE
I desperately needed a telephoto lens, as I said before, I really enjoyed shooting tight portraits with a long focal length, I love the way a telephoto lens compresses the background and easily removes any clutter in the background, have a look at this example, the next shot is taken with my phone (~ 24 or 28mm), do you see how much clutter there is in the background?
 |
| Taken with my Samsung Galaxy S II |
Then I took this next shot seconds before from exactly the same position as the shot above with the 200mm mounted to the 5D2.
 |
| 5D Mark II + 200mm f/2.8 wide open |
Just like magic, isn't it? That's why I am deep in love with long focal lengths, and also why I was using the 85mm f/1.8 a lot on my crop sensor 60D (~ 135mm equivalent). No fast aperture lens would be able to produce the same photo unless it is a long lens. The other reason I wanted a long focal length is just that, to be able to shoot far away subjects.
My choices were limited with my budget, at the not very cheap end of the scale, there is the 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 USM, it is a large lens, with no true (ring) USM, so-so optical performance, and a slow variable aperture. Then there is the excellent 70-200mm series, there are 4 constant aperture lenses, f/4, f/4 IS, f/2.8 and f/2.8 IS. There is no question about the excellence of the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II, it is the favorite lens for wedding photographers (along with the 24-70mm f/2.8), but with its huge size, heavy weight (> 2 kg) and a price over $2000, it was out of the question. The f/2.8 non-IS version was cheaper but still very large and heavy, so that was out as well. The f/4 IS version is much more convinent from the size and weight perspective, and with excellent optical performance, it is much recommended, but unfortunately it was out of my budget as well.
This left me with the 70-200mm f/4 non-IS and the 200mm f/2.8 the subject of this post, both lenses had a similar price tag, the only advantage in favor of the f/4 is the flexibility of the zoom, but a quick EXIF statistics check on all of my shots taken with the 55-250mm showed that 75% of my shots were taken at 250mm, and the remaining shots close to the long end. This sealed the deal for me, I hated the attention-grabbing white color of the 70-200mm lens, and was attracted to the 200mm f/2.8 because of its stealthy black color, faster aperture, sharper optics and svelte handsome looks. For the record, both lenses are not weather sealed. Now lets dig into the review itself.
 |
| Wide open, didn't find a reason yet to stop-it down |
FINALLY, THE *@!# REVIEW (yes, yes, start from here if you came directly for the review)
Let me tell you something important for me, they say "first impressions last forever", and that is true to a large extent, the first shot I took with the 85mm f/1.8 didn't impress me, and when I sold it, I didn't regret it like I regretted selling the 60mm Macro. The first shot I took with the 200mm f/2.8 made me go "Whoa", it was wicked sharp, and the focus was very quick and spot on, it immediately reminded me of the 60mm Macro sharpness.
Before I got this lens, I was worried because of to the brevity and lack of reviews, unlike other lenses, however I am not regretting buying this lens for one second, and here I am writing this review to advise everyone who is thinking about doing a similar purchase.
PACKAGE CONTENTS & BUILD QUALITY
One nice thing about "L" lenses is that they ship with a lens hood and a nice carrying pouch.
 |
| Pouch carrying the lens and the hood (reversed) together |
The lens is not very large compared to other 70-200mm lenses, or even the 70-300mm non-L, it is shorter than both, and it looks like a fit gymnast, long and svelte, it is not as fat as the 24-105mm, the 24-70mm or even my good old 15-85mm. It has a rock solid feel to it, with no moving parts and a strong body, you feel like you can use it to hammer nails. Unfortunately it is not weather sealed, but that's not a big concern to me.
 |
| Coffee mug shown to give you a feel for it's size, the lens on the right is the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM |
 |
| And with the lens hood, it is much longer |
 |
| Lens hood is much wider than the lens body itself, any idea why? |
 |
| Mounted to the 5D Mk II - w/o lens hood |
 |
| Mounted to the 5D Mk II - with lens hood |
SHOOTING EXPERIENCE
Without image stabilization, looking through the viewfinder is a quite shaky experience if you're shooting something close and don't have steady hands, I didn't appreciate the IS on my 55-250 until I tried this lens. Not even the 85mm f/1.8 on the 60D felt this shaky, but don't worry, as long as you're keeping the shutter speed reasonably high (around 1/200 sec) it will be ok, I took sharp shots at 1/50 of a second, but the keeper rate wasn't very high. I never had a blurred picture when using bounce flash indoors or in daylight, hand held shooting is very easy.
The minimum focusing distance of this lens is 1.5 meters, this is close enough to get very tight head-shots and shoot small plants and flowers. There is a focus limiting switch with two settings: "1.5m - infinity" and "3.5m - infinity", the second setting is useful in case you are shooting something far and need the focusing to be as fast as possible with no hunting. Focusing is, of course, very fast and completely silent, with FTM ability.
IMAGE QUALITY & SHARPNESS
One word: breathtaking. This lens has very smooth bokeh, thanks to the long focal length and the wide aperture. I haven't noticed any purple fringing or chromatic aberrations. But sharpness is the real strength of this lens in my opinion, I know that many people consider pixel-peeping as a contagious disease, but even so, when a lens is this sharp, it gives the photos a certain pop that just isn't there when taken with other lenses. Among the several lenses I have owned and tried, the top sharpest lenses are this one, the 60mm Macro and the 100mm Macro L (haven't tried the non-L, want to lend me yours?).
To give you an idea about the sharpness, I will show you 100% crops from similarly sized head-shots that I took along the years. Photos taken with flash or with ambient light only will be mentioned, since flash-lit shots are usually sharper. I know that lenses like the 55-250 and the 85mm f/1.8 are considered to be sharp, and they are, but this is just in a different league altogether.
 |
| Canon 200 @ f/2.8, below is a 100% crop |
 |
| Canon 200mm @ f2.8, ambient, hand held, the lower eyelashes are slightly OOF because of the crazy shallow DoF |
 |
| Canon 60mm Macro @ f/2.8 (wide open), mixture of ambient and bounce flash |
 |
| Canon 85mm @ f/2.8, ambient light |
 |
| Canon 85mm @ f/1.8, ambient light |
 |
| Canon 55-250 @ f/5.6, completely flash-lit |
 |
| Canon 24-105 @ f/5.6, ambient light |
 |
| And just for kicks, Canon 200 @ f/7.1, completely flash-lit, wicked, huh? Full picture below |
 |
| And this is the 200mm @ f/7.1, the only reason we stopped it down was to kill the ambient, I didn't have a 3rd flash to add a rim/hair light |
I hope the above example has left you as shocked as I was, really, this and the macro lenses are something else. Now I have to try the 135mm f/2L. :-)
UPDATE (85mm f/1.8 @ f/2.8 and flash)
If you check the comments below, you will find I was accused that my tests were flawed. I agree. They are of course flawed since they are not tests and they only represent my experience with the various lenses (wide-open, mind you), but the question intrigued me, and I found a couple of samples for the 85mm f/1.8 stopped down a bit and taken with flash, below are 100% crops, one at f/2.8 and the second at f/4, I'll leave the conclusions to you.
 |
| Canon 85mm f/1.8 @ f/2.8, flash, ISO 1600 |
 |
| Canon 85mm f/1.8 @ f/4, flash, ISO 400 |
SUMMARY
Don't be afraid of the fixed 200mm focal length, and try to remember your experience when you are using a zoom lens shooting something far away, 90% chance that you are fully zoomed in and looking for even more zoom, right? I thought so.
As you can imagine, I am totally in love with this lens, it is relatively light, small, black, super sharp, good looking and produced some of my favorite portraits ever. If one thing, I wish it was f/2 and had IS, but wait a second, there is already such a lens, a $6000 lens!
For a price below $800, I consider this lens to be very good deal. Later on, I will probably buy the Kenko 1.4x or the Kenko 2x teleconverter later and convert this lens to a 280mm f/4 or a 400mm f/5.6 lens. And I am choosing the Kenko because they are black.
Now I will leave you with some more examples and links to my earlier lens reviews, please if you have a question, an inquiry or something you'd want me to test, don't hesitate to tell me in the comments below.
RELATED POSTS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
