12-200 vs 12-100 vs 35-100

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Flat view
tomhongkong Veteran Member • Posts: 4,326
12-200 vs 12-100 vs 35-100

I have done some simple tests to compare 12-200 against cropped 12-100 and 35-100.

Because a number of posters, including me, have said that the 12-200 is surprisingly good, there have been some who have said that cropping a 12-100 would give better results. This test was to find the truth. (I own all these lenses, so cannot be said to have an 'ownership bias')

In order to be able to view the images fairly and at the same size, after cropping I resized the two 100mm images to the same pixel width as the 12-200, using DXO bicubic resizing. I am sure there are smarter resizing programs, but the essence of this test is to do it with what I have, not taking for ever over the PP.

DXO was PL5 Elite, images exported to JPEG using deep prime.

No adjustment was made to the images in DXO other than that applied by it as defaults. I am sure the 100s are a bit overexposed even though I added -3ev correction for the darker scene with more greenery because of the wider FL and would benefit from a bit of tickling.

I took all images at f6.3 to equalise things. I have images from the 100s at F4.0 and F2. if anyone wants them and I can apply the same processing.

Please let me know if I am doing something wrong in my cropping and resizing technique.

The clear conclusion is that the 12-200 is substantially sharper at 200mm, than either 100mm cropped, except in the corners. I can live with that, as my subjects are usually in the centre and the corners are probably oof as a result of them being at a different distance. If brick walls are your thing, though, you will not like the 12-200

12-200, f6.3

12-100 f6.3 resized

35-100 f6.3 resized

However you be the judge and please comment.


Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow