Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next OL lens test report - Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM L IS
#11
(01-13-2020, 06:41 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 10:15 AM)Klaus Wrote: Is focus breathing really a big thing?

I added a sentence about it.

In photography, only for those who look for a narrow FOV at close focus (and for video, the both the widening and narrowing kind can be intrusive).

So for me, this widening focus breathing is a negative for this lens. It could not replace my 70-200mm f4 L, which narrows its FOV,  for a lot of things I do with it (or I'd have to add a lot of extension tubing).

It looks like you do a lot of close-ups.
Why not buying a long macro lens instead? It would seem better suited to your shooting style?
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#12
(01-13-2020, 08:57 PM)thxbb12 Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 06:41 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 10:15 AM)Klaus Wrote: Is focus breathing really a big thing?

I added a sentence about it.

In photography, only for those who look for a narrow FOV at close focus (and for video, the both the widening and narrowing kind can be intrusive).

So for me, this widening focus breathing is a negative for this lens. It could not replace my 70-200mm f4 L, which narrows its FOV,  for a lot of things I do with it (or I'd have to add a lot of extension tubing).

It looks like you do a lot of close-ups.
Why not buying a long macro lens instead? It would seem better suited to your shooting style?
200mm macrolens?

And the need to carry 2 lenses?
#13
(01-14-2020, 05:30 AM)Brightcolours Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 08:57 PM)thxbb12 Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 06:41 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 10:15 AM)Klaus Wrote: Is focus breathing really a big thing?

I added a sentence about it.

In photography, only for those who look for a narrow FOV at close focus (and for video, the both the widening and narrowing kind can be intrusive).

So for me, this widening focus breathing is a negative for this lens. It could not replace my 70-200mm f4 L, which narrows its FOV,  for a lot of things I do with it (or I'd have to add a lot of extension tubing).

It looks like you do a lot of close-ups.
Why not buying a long macro lens instead? It would seem better suited to your shooting style?
200mm macrolens?

And the need to carry 2 lenses?

The Sigma EX 150mm f2.8 is quite affordable and should be better and definitely more convenient than extension tubes.
Personally, I'd take a macro lens over extension tubes, but I guess it's a personal matter.
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#14
(01-14-2020, 10:11 AM)thxbb12 Wrote: Brightcolours




The Sigma EX 150mm f2.8 is quite affordable and should be better and definitely more convenient than extension tubes.
Personally, I'd take a macro lens over extension tubes, but I guess your mileage may vary.
  • The/a Sigma 150mm gives a wider FOV than my EF 70-200mm f4 L USM. I'd need a 1.3x TC.
  • The Sigma 150mm weighs 63% more.
  • The Sigma 150mm can/does not double a 70-200mm zoom lens.
I do not take macro images with my 70-200mm f4 L USM, but close up images. "Dealing" with a 12mm extension tube is not a bother to any stretch (which is what I use with it when wanted). 

So, if you'd rather take 150mm than 200mm, 1150 grams rather than 705 grams and extra lenses to cover the 70-200mm range, your mileage indeed varies a lot...

My issue with this new RF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM (disregarding price) is that you do not get a "200mm" FOV at closer up distances, but wider. Not a new issue, it was my issue with the Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 II, the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 and Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 too. It seems a bit odd to advice me to take a look at a 150mm lens which for sure gives a wider FOV, instead...
#15
I don't find it odd: if you mainly take close-up shots, then it makes sense to look at macro lenses instead.
Again, whatever floats your boat.
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#16
(01-13-2020, 12:29 PM)mst Wrote: Well, ok... let's see how this works in practice, I have doubts, to be honest.

Regarding non-extending lenses, I do disagree with your statement. Moving the inner lens groups moves air around, but only air that is in the lens already. So, in theory, there should not be any dust.

Practice shows: there is. But a lot less than in extending zooms.


I'm siding with BC here:

If the filter is of the "micro particle size" which is common theses days in the like of modern cars vacuum cleaners etc ......... there should be no problem with dust ....... I had been wondering why a filter had not been added before!

  ......... as for the Canon 70-200mm it's another masterstroke optic for sure ...... but it focus breathes and the Sigma 150mm F2.8 macro doesn't ......... (I've just checked) ........ so I'll use it being the lens I have ....... however, at portrait distances it has a max aperture of F3.2 ...... giving not exactly the shallowest DOF.

...... thxbb 12 ......... am I right in thinking you have now gone FF ...... if so which?

(01-13-2020, 12:44 PM)toni-a Wrote: Dunno about service in Europe, but here it should be a no issue, all lenses will need some maintenance over time, like camera shutter aperture and flex cables have a lifespan so I would be more worried about those, besides any lens with frequent use,  will need re-centering, cleaning is usually done for free with those services so I wouldn't worry too much, anyway depending on complexity of design elements cleaning at professional service isn't that expensive. I paid 30$ for for 17-55f2.8 IS, 20$ for 100mmf2.8  macro.

You get all that as part of the service from Canon in the Lebanon ....

  re-centering and all ......

   Wow !
Dave's clichés
#17
(01-14-2020, 12:49 PM)davidmanze Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 12:29 PM)mst Wrote: Well, ok... let's see how this works in practice, I have doubts, to be honest.

Regarding non-extending lenses, I do disagree with your statement. Moving the inner lens groups moves air around, but only air that is in the lens already. So, in theory, there should not be any dust.

Practice shows: there is. But a lot less than in extending zooms.


I'm siding with BC here:

If the filter is of the "micro particle size" which is common theses days in the like of modern cars vacuum cleaners etc ......... there should be no problem with dust ....... I had been wondering why a filter had not been added before!

  ......... as for the Canon 70-200mm it's another masterstroke optic for sure ...... but it focus breathes and the Sigma 150mm F2.8 macro doesn't ......... (I've just checked) ........ so I'll use it being the lens I have ....... however, at portrait distances it has a max aperture of F3.2 ...... giving not exactly the shallowest DOF.

   ...... thxbb 12 ......... am I right in thinking you have now gone FF ...... if so which?

(01-13-2020, 12:44 PM)toni-a Wrote: Dunno about service in Europe, but here it should be a no issue, all lenses will need some maintenance over time, like camera shutter aperture and flex cables have a lifespan so I would be more worried about those, besides any lens with frequent use,  will need re-centering, cleaning is usually done for free with those services so I wouldn't worry too much, anyway depending on complexity of design elements cleaning at professional service isn't that expensive. I paid 30$ for for 17-55f2.8 IS, 20$ for 100mmf2.8  macro.

You get all that as part of the service from Canon in the Lebanon ....

  re-centering and all ......

   Wow !

Hey Dave,

I used to shoot FF back then, with a Nikon D800, but I sold it several years ago to go APS-C (Fuji) and MFT (Olympus + Panasonic).
I'm being realistic: for my style of shooting FF is not needed (APS-C with the right lenses is good enough in term of DOF control and the convenience of MFT cannot be matched with FF).
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#18
(01-14-2020, 12:34 PM)thxbb12 Wrote: I don't find it odd: if you mainly take close-up shots, then it makes sense to look at macro lenses instead.
Again, whatever floats your boat.

FOV matters for the outcome. I can take 35mm close ups, or 55mm close ups, or 90mm close ups, or 135mm close ups, and the resulting images will be very different. And if I want longer, like 200mm, 150mm won't cut it. Neither will a widening FOV from focus breathing. 

If you mainly take 200mm close up shots but some other 200mm landscape shots and sometimes go down to 70mm as well, it does not make sense to want to substitute that with 150mm fixed focal length macro.

(01-14-2020, 01:16 PM)thxbb12 Wrote:
(01-14-2020, 12:49 PM)davidmanze Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 12:29 PM)mst Wrote: Well, ok... let's see how this works in practice, I have doubts, to be honest.

Regarding non-extending lenses, I do disagree with your statement. Moving the inner lens groups moves air around, but only air that is in the lens already. So, in theory, there should not be any dust.

Practice shows: there is. But a lot less than in extending zooms.


I'm siding with BC here:

If the filter is of the "micro particle size" which is common theses days in the like of modern cars vacuum cleaners etc ......... there should be no problem with dust ....... I had been wondering why a filter had not been added before!

  ......... as for the Canon 70-200mm it's another masterstroke optic for sure ...... but it focus breathes and the Sigma 150mm F2.8 macro doesn't ......... (I've just checked)
How exactly did you check?
The non-OS Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro does focus breath (narrowing FOV towards MFD) just like my 70-200mm f4.
The OS version focus breathes as well to the same extent  (both do 1:1 at the same MFD, 38cm).
#19
(01-14-2020, 01:16 PM)thxbb12 Wrote:
(01-14-2020, 12:49 PM)davidmanze Wrote:
(01-13-2020, 12:29 PM)mst Wrote: Well, ok... let's see how this works in practice, I have doubts, to be honest.

Regarding non-extending lenses, I do disagree with your statement. Moving the inner lens groups moves air around, but only air that is in the lens already. So, in theory, there should not be any dust.

Practice shows: there is. But a lot less than in extending zooms.


I'm siding with BC here:

If the filter is of the "micro particle size" which is common theses days in the like of modern cars vacuum cleaners etc ......... there should be no problem with dust ....... I had been wondering why a filter had not been added before!

  ......... as for the Canon 70-200mm it's another masterstroke optic for sure ...... but it focus breathes and the Sigma 150mm F2.8 macro doesn't ......... (I've just checked) ........ so I'll use it being the lens I have ....... however, at portrait distances it has a max aperture of F3.2 ...... giving not exactly the shallowest DOF.

   ...... thxbb 12 ......... am I right in thinking you have now gone FF ...... if so which?

(01-13-2020, 12:44 PM)toni-a Wrote: Dunno about service in Europe, but here it should be a no issue, all lenses will need some maintenance over time, like camera shutter aperture and flex cables have a lifespan so I would be more worried about those, besides any lens with frequent use,  will need re-centering, cleaning is usually done for free with those services so I wouldn't worry too much, anyway depending on complexity of design elements cleaning at professional service isn't that expensive. I paid 30$ for for 17-55f2.8 IS, 20$ for 100mmf2.8  macro.

You get all that as part of the service from Canon in the Lebanon ....

  re-centering and all ......

   Wow !

Hey Dave,

I used to shoot FF back then, with a Nikon D800, but I sold it several years ago to go APS-C (Fuji) and MFT (Olympus + Panasonic).
I'm being realistic: for my style of shooting FF is not needed (APS-C with the right lenses is good enough in term of DOF control and the convenience of MFT cannot be matched with FF).
 OK, I  thought you had had a "very discrete" format change ........ Smile
Dave's clichés
#20
@Dave, ehehe what made you think that? Tongue
--Florent

Flickr gallery
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)