5 TeleZooms - Sibling Rivalry Photo Gallery by lightrules at pbase.com

5 TeleZooms - Sibling Rivalry

Nov 9 2006: Tested here are 5 tele zooms, including the new 70-200 f4 L IS USM.

Canon 70-300 IS
Canon 70-200 F4 IS
Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS
Canon 100-400 IS
Sigma 100-300 F4 EX

Note that I don't specifically state when a 1.4xTC or 2xTC is used, but I do state the effective focal length and aperture of each lens. So, for example, if you see "7-2f4IS" and it is at 280mm f5.6, you can assume it's using a 1.4xTC at wide open (200mm f4 + 1.4xTC = 280mm f5.6). All lenses tested on a 20D, tripod, IS off, best centerpoint AF taken out of 5 for each, etc. My usual procedure that you all are used to. Take your time viewing at "ORIGINAL" (as always), and feel free to leave your comments or questions at any page. Enjoy the light. [For more test crops of the new f4 IS versus other lenses, see http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/70200f4lis ]

5 Lenses	5 Lenses	70-300IS Weight	70-200f4IS Weight
70-200f2.8IS Weight	100-400IS Weight	100-300EXDG Weight	100mm f4.5
200mm f4	280mm f4	280mm-300mm f5.6	280mm f5.6
400mm-420mm f5.6	400mm-420mm f8	$1Bill Quiz

comment |

lightrules		15-Jan-2007 23:37
As my test results show, the 1-3EX is superior to the 7-3IS in every way. But of course, the 1-3 is a beast, so to speak, and the 7-3 is nice and small relatively-speaking. So it's another example that every lens choice is a compromise. The 7-3IS is a great travel/walkaround telezoom, no doubt about that.

Gareth Cooper		15-Jan-2007 19:35
I'm curious on your opinions between the Canon 70-300mm IS and the Sigma 100-300mm F4. I own the Sigma 100-300mm f4 and I'm very pleased with it, but it's a big 'ol lump of glass to lug about and I was wondering of the smaller lens looses anything optically against the Sigma (apart from the stop at the long end)? Personally, I think that the Sigma 100-300mm f4 is Sigma's best handling lens. It feels so nice to use.

lightrules		24-Nov-2006 16:58
You're welcome for the "yapping." As for the 1-3EX, it is an optical gem. You are very correct that it is quite a load to carry around, but not anymore so than the 7-2f2.8IS or 1-4IS. The Sigma definitely flourishes with a monopod/tripod, but it is handholdable in the right light.

Guest		24-Nov-2006 16:53
I've appreciated the "yapping" on this site, particularly from the owner.... What strikes me in this set of comparisons is how well the Sigma does. It seems to give up very little with a 1.4xTC. It's a heck of a chunk to haul around, tho.

lightrules		11-Nov-2006 15:25
Fine comments, Tom. I'd basically agree with your assessment. 2xTCs really cause a serious contrast hit; there's no doubt about it. As for a IS v Non-IS test, I don't think it's forthcoming but I don't think there's much difference in my experience with them both. Happy LA shooting.

Tom Yi		11-Nov-2006 14:10
Ah, once again good stuff and very enlightening. Thanks for not yapping and just showing the snappings. =) Some things I noted: 1. Without TC's the 70-200 zooms seem to have more contrast and a touch more resolution. 2. A 70-200 with a 1.4 TC can really rival a supertelephoto like the 100-400L ayt 280mm. But it seems with a 2x TC the contrast seems to really suffer. I guess if you do a bit of long distance work, a supertelephoto makes more sense than a 70-200 with a 2X TC. However, I think I would use a high quality 1.4 TC on a fast lens without any concerns. 3. Optically, I think the 70-300IS seems to be the worst performer here. Not a surprise considering the price and the fact that this is a consumer lens, but it still performs well. 4. Lastly, I think we get too caught up in resolution and forget to consider other just as important factors such as contrast, distortion (more important on wides), and color cast (less so if you shoot dslr's). 5. With all the craze about the IS lenses, I'd like to see a 70-200 f2.8 IS vs Non IS shoot out as well. :)

click on thumbnails for full image