Based on what MTF at Canon. Most of the lens testing sites have the Nikon and Canon 70-200 neck and neck one site say canon is better one says Nikon is better. For me they are both stellar. One caveat is there is no focus breathing on the Canon.
Canon's MTF curves are calculated, not measured. I'd wait with these kind of declarations until tests are made to it and the new Tamron in several sites.
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Based on what MTF at Canon. Most of the lens testing sites have the Nikon and Canon 70-200 neck and neck one site say canon is better one says Nikon is better. For me they are both stellar. One caveat is there is no focus breathing on the Canon.
the thing I know about the Canon 70-200 is that is is like just BARELY less sharp than the Nikon IN THE CENTER...however it's sharper in the corners than the Nikon.
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Based on what MTF at Canon. Most of the lens testing sites have the Nikon and Canon 70-200 neck and neck one site say canon is better one says Nikon is better.
Maybe if you're looking only at tests done on APS-C. But on full frame, your statement is not accurate at all. The large majority of lens testing sites have shown that the new 70-200L from Canon is the best of its class in full frame. Photozone, dpreview, slrgear, lenstip, and just about every reputable website I can remember. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they would be in the minority.
stargazer78 wrote:
Maybe if you're looking only at tests done on APS-C. But on full frame, your statement is not accurate at all. The large majority of lens testing sites have shown that the new 70-200L from Canon is the best of its class in full frame. Photozone, dpreview, slrgear, lenstip, and just about every reputable website I can remember. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they would be in the minority.
You may want to check out the sites yourself before you make auc statements. Photozone and lenstip are the only reliable test sites photozone has the Nikon easily beating the canon at all focal lengths and apertures. Lenstip has the canon slightly ahead at f2.8. Dpreview is garbage as far as I'm concerned and the rest results are basically equal. SLR gear same as dpeview no chrys graphs or numbers to compare so basically a wash. Even the digital picture shows these lenses dead even.
It will be sharper than the 70-200 II. I've heard from a very reliable source that aside from the 2 UD and 1 Super-UD aspheric elements, there will be 1 Kryptonite lead-like glass element.
kewlcanon wrote:
Yep, just like 70-200 IS II, the sharpest 70-200mm in the world.
Yakim Peled wrote:
Canon's MTF curves are calculated, not measured. I'd wait with these kind of declarations until tests are made to it and the new Tamron in several sites.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Does anyone know if Canon's 'calculated' MTF curves ended up matching what was measured (by others) for the 70-20/2.8L IS II after it was released?
Bruce Sawle wrote:
You may want to check out the sites yourself before you make auc statements. Photozone and lenstip are the only reliable test sites photozone has the Nikon easily beating the canon at all focal lengths and apertures. Lenstip has the canon slightly ahead at f2.8. Dpreview is garbage as far as I'm concerned and the rest results are basically equal. SLR gear same as dpeview no chrys graphs or numbers to compare so basically a wash. Even the digital picture shows these lenses dead even.
Have you looked at the charts. The Nikon beats te canon regardless of what there final verdict stars say if you buy a lens based on stars then you are in trouble. Look at the charts and the numbers don't lie.
Why bothers with the charts ?. I have both lenses, based on my observation, the Canon is still sharper than the Nikon.
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Have you looked at the charts. The Nikon beats te canon regardless of what there final verdict stars say if you buy a lens based on stars then you are in trouble. Look at the charts and the numbers don't lie.
