70-200 f2.8 Shootout2007-10-09T08:18:53+02:00

Explore Forums Discussions Camera Equipment SLR/DSLR Lenses 70-200 f2.8 Shootout

70-200 f2.8 Shootout

  • Author
    Posts
  • Peter Betts
    Participant
    Post count: 1250

    I was in the CNA just now getting some stationary etc and saw the latest British Photog mag “Digital Photographer” (The R129.00 job!!) The main article was a comparative test between what are currently accepted as the top 3 lenses in this key category. I say key because with my 1.5 x Crop D200 and a sharp Nikon 1.4x convertor it is the lens I use 90% of the time in Kruger and Addo on large game and close birds from the car and for walk and stalk handheld at Rest camps. Once I loose the advantage of the crop with my next camera and 2nd wedding body I reckon the big 200-400 will play a more active part in my pic taking (Will need to do more Gym work on the triceps to be able to stand the extra heft and weight!!!!)

    When I saw the article I said the Canon will win as they seem to plug that brand more than any others but I will say their Tests are pretty unbiased and very comprehensive and I have used their info on numerous occassions to help me in the correct route to take as far as system building goes.

    They looked at various key categories like Value for money, Weight, Ease of use, and Image Quality (The most important Category in my book if you are going to spend more than R15000 on a piece of glass.) I wasnt too interested in the Sigma version (Not that it is a bad lens …far from it and I recall it got the highest marks for Ease of Use ). The results for Ease of Use and Value for money were about even between Canon and Nikon. Nikon was slightly ahead in the weight category but in the Key Image Quality Section Nikon outstripped the other two by quite a long way. Canon got 8/10 in this important category which is not shabby at all but the VR Version from Nikon scored a full house 10/10 for image quality which leaves me feeling very satisfied with my purchase and should I mess up it will be me and not the lens.
    The final result was 3rd Sigma with 83% , 2nd the Canon L IS @ 88% and 1st place went to the Nikon VR ED Glass Lens @ 93% with the comment that it lost a lot of points through being pricey but with the proviso that with that IQuality the price is probably warranted
    I didnt buy the Mag but maybe I will break down later this week and get it as a reference for my library of Data

  • Esmari
    Participant
    Post count: 331

    I am amazed that your memory has retained such a lot of data, from CNA to computer!

  • Troop
    Participant
    Post count: 281

    Very interesting indeed…..

    Peter

    If you didn’t have the 200-400 and were going for a D300 instead of the D3 what would glass would you buy?

  • vjgreene
    Participant
    Post count: 1345

    I read a post somewhere of a Canon user using the Nikon 70-200 with adaptor and he also recons its better than the Canon version.

    On the other hand Canon has some excellent fast short primes Nikon does not have……………

  • Missy
    Participant
    Post count: 1072

    steveb;71938 wrote:
    Very interesting indeed…..

    If you didn’t have the 200-400 and were going for a D300 instead of the D3 what would glass would you buy?

    Steve if I was starting out and getting a D300 as my 1st camera as you asked then this versatile combination of the 70-200 f2.8 and the 200-400 (at that crop is 100-600 ) both the sharpest wild life zooms around and with the now confirmed 100% Quality of the smaller 70-200 equal to that of the similar quality 200-400 they are equal or better than any prime and the convenience of seemless zooming (no overlap) as opposed to fixed lens composing problems in Wild life. You cant walk backwards with a prime in a car in Kruger but you can zoom around with a zoom and if there is no difference in image quality or probably better in most cases then its a no brainer. and of course both these lenses have the advantage of not only having the 1.4 x convertor but the unique 1.7 x as well which pushes the big zoom right into the realm of a big 500/600 arena power wise with no lose of Quality which takes the pressure off me investing in one of those R100000 jobs

  • Troop
    Participant
    Post count: 281

    Peter,

    I was hoping you were going to say that as I have set my goals on a D300 and the 200-400.

    Thanks for confirming 😀 😀

  • Crunchie007
    Participant
    Post count: 376

    Peter,

    Thanks for the review of the article. It confirms my perception (biased and unscientific) about the image quality of my Nikon 70-200. I get very good results even with the 1.7x TC (see the moon shots in my gallery). I may have to get a 1.4x as well….

  • Missy
    Participant
    Post count: 1072

    Fanie;71939 wrote:
    I read a post somewhere of a Canon user using the Nikon 70-200 with adaptor and he also recons its better than the Canon version.

    On the other hand Canon has some excellent fast short primes Nikon does not have……………

    Absolutely Fanie…the Canon line up of lenses is far more complete than Nikon but this survey was just on the 70-200 range taking the top 3 in that class.. It would be nice if Nikon brought out a screamer in 105, 135 etc and updated the 85 f1.4 to AFS Nano etc

  • Jola
    Participant
    Post count: 3480

    Just as well nobody was interested in my 70-200VR when I advertised it. And now that I will get a D300 (maybe) it will probably get a lot of use.

    I took some pictures with a D300 and was not impressed with the high iso noise. But I will wait for the production models and see what the reviews say – also about the AF, which is the main reason why I want it. If its not good enough I may sell my house and get a D3 – but I would hate to lose the crop factor on the birds / wildlife.

  • owensafrica
    Participant
    Post count: 68

    Peter R Betts;71935 wrote:
    … with the comment that it lost a lot of points through being pricey but with the proviso that with that IQuality the price is probably warranted …

    Price difference? There are no real price difference between C&N in this lens.
    From ODP shop
    Canon – R18200
    Nikon – R19000

    That is R800. Or 800/18200 = 4% more expensive… Not a big difference!

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.Log In

People Who Like Thisx

Loading...