Reading mode: Light Dark

L glass is something else!

Go to last post
photofan1986

photofan1986

Veteran Member
Messages
4,123
Solutions
3
Reaction score
2,954
Location
BE
I just upgraded from my 55-250 basic kit telezoom lens to the 70-200 F4.0 IS USM lens. What a difference it makes!

Here are two photos taken from the same location at the same moment on my 450D. Pics are resized at 3000x2000. Sorry for the vertical shot with the 55-250.
Both shots taken at 200mm f5.6.
What do you think?
Click "original" for a full size sample.

55-250





70-200



 
Wow, big difference.
I'am just now deciding what to buy 55-250 IS or 70-200 f4 (no IS UMS).

--
Canon 1000D
 
I shot in auto WB, so that might be the difference.
 
The two photos are just different, it's hard to judge which one is better or more accurate. It seems either the WB or exposure was different, the 2nd picture is noticeably darker.
 
I think because there is more contrast in 70-200, you get the impression that it is sharper because lines are more clear.

still, it is a strong benefit of the 70-200.

but i would caution you to think all L lenses are that good, they are not. I didnt find 16-35 to be any better than 10-22 or tokina 11-16.

--
Do you have a clown that follows you wherever you go? mine is called Fred.
 
I have both lenses. Indeed the 70-200L f/4 IS is better than the 55-250 IS. However, I think the question is "Is the difference worth the 5.25X price?"

The L is faster to focus with excellent contrast. The 55-250 is a little slower and may require more post processing than the L but post processing can make the output very close to that of the L.

The 55-250 IS is still a little gem for its price and is my favorite travel tele.
--
Olga
 
I'm glad you've made those comments as I know you have a good eye for these things, and no doubt a better monitor. It really would have helped me if the two photos had been really identical in their settings and focal length. Of course it may be argued that the 55-250 lens doesn't focus as well but I find the two pictures hard to compare and just want to pp them and resize.
 
photofan1986 said:
I just upgraded from my 55-250 basic kit telezoom lens to the 70-200 F4.0 IS USM lens. What a difference it makes!

Here are two photos taken from the same location at the same moment on my 450D. Pics are resized at 3000x2000. Sorry for the vertical shot with the 55-250.
Both shots taken at 200mm f5.6.
What do you think?
Click "original" for a full size sample.
Click to expand...
I experienced the same thing - I got my XSi and the Sigma 18-200 OS (the Canon hadn't been released yet) and first upgraded to the Canon 17-55 last year for a trip to Italy. Big difference in image quality. About the middle of this year I added the 70-200L f4 IS to complement it and the difference at 200mm compared to the Sigma (and the Canon) is very significant, especially in tough conditions or when seriously cropping. I recently added the 100-400L for shooting airshows and wildlife and the 70-200L f4 IS is still the best lens I've got. There is no other zoom lens that meets or beats the f4 IS's IQ, especially at that price point. The new f2.8 MK II comes close but at about twice the price and weight.
 
sorry this one



 
Ok guys, time to tell the truth :D

Both of those pictures were actually taken with the 55-250 on my 450D . I have no L glass unfortunately.

The vertical one was taken at 250mm and 7.1 and the other was taken at 250mm and 5.6 (so wide open!!). The only difference is the better focus and the post processing. I used smart sharpen and contrast feature in Photoshop to enhance the horizontal picture. The other one is untouched, SOOC.

Just wanted to show that even a cheap lens like the 55-250 can produce great results when used correctly and with some PP.

However, this lens is giving me some inconsistent results: sometimes the result is excellent, like on the horizontal one, and sometimes the focus is not that great and the picture quality suffers as a whole. I suppose a good L glass like the 70-200 F4.0 IS would give me more consistent results.

Anyway, sorry for misleading you and tank you for your input :p

edit: oh and for those curious about the "L glass" picture, here it is untouched (only resized at 3000*2000)





And the "L glass" version



 
I think we all learned something today as the OP has fooled us :)

It just proves with careful shooting and post processing you can get excellent results.

The question remains, what do you get with a lens 5x the cost and 3x the weight and size?
AnthonyL said:
I'm glad you've made those comments as I know you have a good eye for these things, and no doubt a better monitor. It really would have helped me if the two photos had been really identical in their settings and focal length. Of course it may be argued that the 55-250 lens doesn't focus as well but I find the two pictures hard to compare and just want to pp them and resize.
Click to expand...
--
Kind regards
Imqqmi



http://www.pbase.com/imqqmi

The DSLR jargon cheatsheet:
http://www.jmbfoto.nl/dslrcheatsheet.pdf

Sunset blending tutorial:
http://www.jmbfoto.nl/tutorial/blendingTutorial01a.pdf
 
It just proves how hard it is to see the difference in the lenses when all the rest is done correctly. :)
--

I took a course in art last winter. I learnt the difference between a fine oil painting, and a mechanical thing, like a photograph. The photograph shows only the reality. The painting shows not only the reality, but the dream behind it.
 
One of my favorite questions runs something like this, "I want to upgrade my kit lens and shoot mainly landscapes. What should I buy?"

My stock answer is a good tripod, unless you are really creative and need a much wider lens. The point is that when shootijng landscapes you stop down to something like f8 to f16 for maximum DOF. Stopped down any decent lens will give you excellent results and you will see more improvement by using a good tripod.
--
Jim
http://www.pbase.com/jcassatt
 
I have the 55-250 and am planning to get the 70-200 2.8 IS mk2 when I buy my 60D in early January (just before rebates expire). $400 off will make it a wonderful deal for that lens.

Now I have to wonder if that is really the best use of $2000 ....

--
If it's a Single Lens Reflex, why do I need so many lenses?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top