You keep talking the lenses MUST be mounted on the same camera and tested vigorously yet u show the 2 links the lenses use on two different bodies... you are the one that is slow and contradicting in your replies..:bsmilie:
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM L IS II review
- Thread starter tonylim
- Start date
You keep talking the lenses MUST be mounted on the same camera and tested vigorously yet u show the 2 links the lenses use on two different bodies... you are the one that is slow and contradicting in your replies..:bsmilie:
who is the illiterate?? You yrself said must compare apple to apple yet you insist in comparing apple with orange.. Obviously you are trolling...Comparing the center to the edge different in resolutions for 2 different lenses on 2 different sensor sizes... and you can conclude which is the better lens.. You are really smart... nothing to say.. i rest my case here.. continue yr trolling
who is the illiterate?? You yrself said must compare apple to apple yet you insist in comparing apple with orange.. Obviously you are trolling...Comparing the center to the edge different in resolutions for 2 different lenses on 2 different sensor sizes... and you can conclude which is the better lens.. You are really smart... nothing to say.. i rest my case here.. continue yr trolling
a) I NEVER claim one lens out-resolves another lens the same way you did. If you want to make such claims, the lenses MUST be mounted on the same camera and tested vigorously. You were the one who says the center portion of one lens is sharper than that on another lens. But you could NEVER provide any supporting evidence to back yourself up.
b) Since you are quite slow, let me repeat myself here on how benchmarks or comparisons are made:
Look at maximum sharpness that can be achieved by lens relative to performance of sensor. Now look at the performance wide open: both center and edges. See how it evolves as the lens is stopped down. Judge from there.
So, if on one lens, you look at the measurements and see a HUGE difference between the edge and the center performance (e.g. Nikon 10-24) and you don't see the same on another lens (e.g. Canon 10-22), then it is VERY obvious which one is the better lens. BOTH are mounted on APS-C cameras.
c) A Nikon user who comes to the Canon forum to make BASELESS claims he cannot support = Troll. Why else are you here?
Last edited:
Exactly, talking about Nikon rubbish in a Canon subforum
i guess since the refence to Nikon stuff is it's not very constructive and based on some personal views, i think the intention of that dude is pretty questionable. hats off to the brother who's trying hard to explain but hitting a brick wall. :mad2:I think most of us get what you're saying except a very select individual
who is the illiterate?? You yrself said must compare apple to apple yet you insist in comparing apple with orange.. Obviously you are trolling...Comparing the center to the edge different in resolutions for 2 different lenses on 2 different sensor sizes... and you can conclude which is the better lens.. You are really smart... nothing to say.. i rest my case here.. continue yr trolling
really confusing... u talking about yourself here?
anyway i hope you really rest your case here as you mentioned. no real benefit in stating a nikon lens is cheaper and much better than a canon lens in a canon forum, and on a thread dedicated to the canon lens. i think that is the real definition of trolling.
hope this thread can continue with more constructive stuff henceforth, not that i want to buy this lens, but good to know how different lenses are measuring up (whether disappointment or good performer)
This lens is even more droolworthy when you use it with the 2x TC. Take a look at this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=6&APIComp=0.
You use extender on your 70-200? Thinking of buying, with 7D will make it 640mm
Yes you can use extender with it.
You use extender on your 70-200? Thinking of buying, with 7D will make it 640mm
Some IMPORTANT warning here.
a) Not all teleconverters are made the same. Some are better than others. Please check this out.
b) It'll be good to bring your lens + camera to test the TC before purchasing it. For example, the Kenko/Teleplus Pro 300 DGX teleconverters have limitations on some lenses. See this. Not sure about compatibility with the new 70-200 f/2.8 IS Mk2 'cos it's so new.
Thanks for the warning, thinking of getting the Canon TC. Hopefully it is the most compatible. But, still, i think i will heed your advice and bring it to try..
17-55 Nikon has better IQ and is better built
24-70 Nikon wins hands down for similar reasons
16-35 Distortion aside which can be corrected and isn't obvious unless you force it, it's much sharper than Canon's f2.8
So what you talking about?
Can we declare doodah the ultimate obstinate Canon fanboy with subjective tastes who is partial towards certain lenses only?
Canon's 50L is by no means mediocre. The 50 1.4 IS the mediocre one
Canon's 50L is by no means mediocre. The 50 1.4 IS the mediocre one
Do note you F-stop will reduce when u use teleconverters as well.
Duly noted, i think F2.8 will drop to 4 and 5.6 using TC1.4 and TC2 , from what I read in Canon website ... specs of Mk2
I think we should stop this Canon lenses vs Nikon lenses debate. Pls focus the discussion on Canon lenses as this is the Canon discussion thread.
Similar threads
