Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    295

    70-200 f4 IS vs Non-IS Sharpness

    I have read that the 70-200 f/4 IS is equal to, if not sharper than, the f2.8 models. But my question is, is the 70-200 f4 Non-IS model as sharp as the IS model? I have read many different forums and threads with differing opinions and was wondering what you guys thought/knew about this situation.

    Please keep in mind that this is not a thread discussing the benefit of IS vs Non-IS. I am asking strictly based off of sharpness (Both cameras on a tripod, IS model with IS turned off). Which is sharper and gives the better image.

    This question is quite possibly what is keeping me from switching to Canon.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    3,209
    i haven't owned the IS version, but if you choice is between those two lenses, you've got a win/win choice to make.
    40d | 5d mk II | 2.8/16 zenitar fisheye | 16-35L | 35L | sigma 1.4/50 | sigma 2.8/50 Macro | sigma 1.4/85 | 70-200L IS
    website
    disclaimer: posts are for personal entertainment only...not to be taken seriously...ever.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brookfield, MA
    Posts
    1,140
    Have a play with different lenses and cameras on the site below. It may give you an idea if one is sharper than another. Hovering your mouse over the arrow selects the chart for the particular lens.

    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...0&LensComp=104
    Mark........

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    295
    Thanks for the link Mark. It looks like the IS version is MUCH sharper. That is unfortunate.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Louisiana, US
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by Myboostedgst View Post
    Thanks for the link Mark. It looks like the IS version is MUCH sharper. That is unfortunate.
    I wouldn't bank on that. Both are really outstanding in the sharpness realm. You just need to decide if you need the IS for what you'll be shooting.
    Nikon D7000 | Nikon 50mm f/1.8G | Nikon SB-700 | Gitzo 0531

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by josef View Post
    I wouldn't bank on that. Both are really outstanding in the sharpness realm. You just need to decide if you need the IS for what you'll be shooting.
    I would not need the IS for what I am shooting. The only real time I would use the 70-200 would be for outdoor action photos (Motocross almost exclusively). Otherwise, I put the camera on a tripod and just use whichever lens is the sharpest. If that is the 70-200, so be it. I would just move the camera back from the car (I do lots of automotive photography as well) and adjust the frame then. I just have heard the 70-200 f4 is one of the sharpest lenses out there, it is just unfortunate that it is the IS version and not the non IS version. I would love to spend $600 instead of $1200.

    My dream setup is a 500d, Tamron 17-50 f2.8, and a 70-200 f4. Maybe in a few years I will move from Nikon to Canon.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brookfield, MA
    Posts
    1,140
    Take a browse through the reviews for the subject lenses in the link below. I honestly don't think in real life use you'll find much noticeable difference in the image quality between those lenses. If you really want to know the answer, I would suggest renting both lenses, make the comparisons, and decide yourself which is better.

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...page=12&stype=
    Mark........

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    295
    That would be a good idea to rent both and try them, but unfortunately I don't own a canon. This was more to find out if moving to a Canon is a good idea currently for me.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brookfield, MA
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Myboostedgst View Post
    That would be a good idea to rent both and try them, but unfortunately I don't own a canon. This was more to find out if moving to a Canon is a good idea currently for me.
    Rent the camera as well, that way you'll have a better feel if Canon is a good fit for you.
    Mark........

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_48 View Post
    Rent the camera as well, that way you'll have a better feel if Canon is a good fit for you.
    You must be rolling in $ because I know I can't afford it. I'm a broke college kid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •