Canon won't be impressed. More on this ... next week ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
01-07-2020, 11:09 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2020, 11:11 AM by Brightcolours.)
Nikon's SR element appears to be something similar in function as Canon's BR.
The MTFs look amazing, better at the corners than the AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 FL VR, and quite a bit better than the Canon RF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM. And those two lenses are pretty good themselves.
The Canon's main party piece is the low weight (400 grams less) and small size in the bag. But that does come with quite some widening focus breathing expense.
Kudos to Canon for the size and weight advantage, but for such a lens, I don't really like the idea of an extending zoom. Any zoom that changes its length accumulates dust over time, no matter if sealed or not.
Plus, focus breathing shouldn't be an issue in this lens class anymore... didn't we go through several generations to get rid of it?
Little bonus in the Nikon: they claim it's parfocal.
Parfocal just means that the lens stays in focus while changing focal length (zooming) right? What is special about that? My old 70-200mm f4 L IS USM is parfocal, as are probably all Canon 70-200mm lenses. Only when I add extension tubes, it loses this parfocalness (which is expected). I think that most zoom lenses I have used were parfocal.
I don't see what the bonus is when it is normal for such a lens.
I haven't done any extensive testing with the different 70-200 lenses, but from my experience, in general most zooms are not parfocal.