If the below actually matches reality (and it seems hard to believe considering it has but two UD (like the f/4 IS) but no fluorite!) it does suddenly seem a bit intriguing:
old 70-300 non-L:
new 70-300 L:
70-200 f/4 IS:
70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC II (they only give MTF for the III for the two new super-tele ):
300 f/4 IS:
It is a pain to tack the 1.4c tc on and off the 70-200 f/4 IS all the time, maybe this could actually replace that combo for a travel/long hike lens. It is a little heavier though (although not if you carried the TC with 70-200 too, only 100g then) and there is the chance it might be worse than f/4.5 at 200mm though but one can hope.
Will the contrast, color, etc. match the 70-200 f/4 IS, the super high MTF micro-contrast not measured??
(random side note: I also note that the new TCs have radically different internal design than the old ones.)
(do keep in mind that while i found a bare 70-300 IS at f/8 to beat the 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC at 280mm f/8 I did NOT find that to be the case at f/5.6! I actually found the 70-200+TC to be better quite contrary to the MTF charts; also the MTF charts show the 1.4x magically making the 70-200 BETTER at 70mm, so who knows....)
digitalbug30d wrote:
wow I am speechless and dont know what the hell these mean...
Cmon...really
It's a lens junkie's way of pre-pixel peeping
All I can tell is that the new lens is gonna be sharper than the consumer-grade 70-300 and the 70-300 DO, but not as sharp as the 70-200 f/4. However, I could have guessed that without the aid of MTF charts.
pipspeak wrote:
It's a lens junkie's way of pre-pixel peeping
All I can tell is that the new lens is gonna be sharper than the consumer-grade 70-300 and the 70-300 DO, but not as sharp as the 70-200 f/4. However, I could have guessed that without the aid of MTF charts.
the crazy thing is the MTF charts don't really look any worse than the ones for the 70-200 f/4 IS
Snopchenko wrote:
Because they have a protruding rear element that only matches the current L telephotos from 135/2 and above.
What has a protruding rear element? The TC III?
The block diagram shows the distance from the front to the rear element to be 140 mm at minimum, and with a total lens length of 143 mm there is no chance that a Canon TC will physically fit.
what are the numbers on the X axis, Y axis and which lines am i supposed to be looking at?
The closer to "1" the line gets the stronger the signal to noise.
"0" is considered the center of the lens and "20" the edge of the lens.
The MTF is the design expectation or the actual performance of the lens. Production tolerance will determine whether it meets, exceeds or falls below expectations. But considering the cost expect a few bad copies to slip by. If you want perfectly matching lenses all the time expect prices 10x of those now.
Most people dismiss MTFs while I look at it as a good indicator whether it can withstand 50MP or 120MP CMOS sensors. That's why "film" lenses like the 200/1.8L and 1200/5.6L are oddities not on my list.
dolina wrote:
The closer to "1" the line gets the stronger the signal to noise.
"0" is considered the center of the lens and "20" the edge of the lens.
To be more precise, 0 on the horizontal axis is the center of the image projected onto the film/sensor plane, and the other numbers are the distance from the center of the image outward in millimeters.
):
