New Canon EF 70-200mm II

[Tom Lowe]

Tom,

my question is: Are you interested in making extraordinary images or you are somehow "hooked" in a sort of sensor size "ideology"?

Sanjin, my friend, I don't care about "sensor ideology," I only care about "image quality." And bigger sensors, generally speaking, provide better image quality.

For example, what if I took you out with me to a nice location to film a sunset on Red MX. I will use the Red MX in 4.5K mode, and you will use your MX in 2K mode. Whose image will look better?

I can say the same thing about Canon cameras. I will use the 5D2, and you use the 7D. Whose image is going to look better?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Tom, my friend, for example Leica S2 that has 30 x 45 mm in size with 37.5 million pixels (5000x7500 pixels)

is not inferior in image quality at all to Hasselblad top performer H4d-60 that has 40.2×53.7 mm with 60.1 Mpixels (6708×8956 pixels).

What about this comparison above?

I was talking more about lens choice freedom that you can get with GH2 and according to Barry Green interview from IBC Panasonic is making new electronic mount

that you can also fully run AF from Canon EF or Nikon G lenses on GH2 and AF101 new Panasonic 4/3 base mount DSLR/video cameras!!!

BTW, for example did you ever try out Novoflex/16:9 Nikon G to EOS adapter with Nikon G 14-24mm f/2.8 super sharp and fast wide angle on any of yours timelapse experiments?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Panasonic GH2 is going to take many of DSLR HD shooters because it's the best small DSLR HD video

and timelapse camera on the market for sure in next year and maybe even longer...

Also with Panasonic GH2 you will be able to shoot extraordinary time-lapse in RAW

Dude, puh-leeeze.. The image quality just isn't there with the GH2. Sorry. I admit that I have not got my hands on one just yet, but I've used the G2 that came out a few months ago -- same sensor. I've seen a handful of stills from the GH2. I'll take a look at one when I get a chance. But there's no freaking way it can top the IQ of the 1Ds4, D3s or even the 5Dm2... Sorry. Not going to happen. It might have some better features for video, BFD.. If you're shooting time-lapse, the GH2 is nowhere near "the best". It lacks the sensor size, it lacks the DR, it has Panasonic's "Venus Engine" image processing which sucks monkey balls...

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Tom, my friend, for example Leica S2 that has 30 x 45 mm in size with 37.5 million pixels (5000x7500 pixels)

is not inferior in image quality at all to Hasselblad top performer H4d-60 that has 40.2×53.7 mm with 60.1 Mpixels (6708×8956 pixels).

What about this comparison above?

Sanjin,

Leica S2 produces more noise at ISO 640 than a 747-400 at take off. At ISO 1250 the noise is probably brighter than the Milky Way itself. Any current Canon or Nikon DSLR, including those costing a few hundred bucks, beats Leica S2 in sensitivity department.

Hasselblad? Does it go beyond ISO 400?

These cameras are dedicated studio still picture cameras, where lighting is controlled and sensitivity or speed are not required. For a good time lapse and field camera you need sensitivity and low noise and Leica S2 or Hasselblad must be some of the WORST cameras for that application as far as picture quality goes.

 

[Evin Grant]

Meanwhile, back on the subject at hand...

I think the current "II" versions of both the Canon and Nikon 70-200mm lenses are by far the best of breed in medium tele-zooms. With the exception of breathing I think the 14-24/24-70/70-200 2.8 Nikkors are every bit the equal optically of the Optimos. I'm still not much impressed by Canon's wide zooms but there is no doubt the 70-200 II is a winner.

 

[Rudi Herbert]

Nice, very nice. Actually, I was shooting a few tests the other day with a friend that has this lens and we compared it against my Nikon 70-200 VR2, and they were dead even on sharpness, except that the Nikon is much sharper hand held thanks to the VR (vibration reduction) process, and the Nikon has a much more pleasant bokeh, but I'm beginning to wade into dangerous waters Suffice to say that we have such excellent options nowadays in the still lens field to use with RED, which, coupled with the ever cheapening nature of PL lenses like the RED RPP, should really make the argument of great lenses being available to a few a thing of the past. I, for one, I'm set with my Nikons for the foreseeable future.

 

[Anson Fogel]

Thanks Tom for this data - the 70-200 is the only still lens I deeply LOVE for motion, the focus is long and mechanically clean enough for me to successfully use on narrative and for challenging real-time eye focus on run and gun. So this is a great new piece of news. I am now shooting all PL glass (RED, Zeiss, etc) - and while I love and need the mechanics, they are not any sharper than much of my Canon L Glass.

I would also like to submit for best RedUser response to a Sanjin-Dream-Post - Jeff's use of the Phrase "sucks monkey balls" at the end of his reply is, well, about as good as it gets around here.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Leica's are still better.

Leica's are still better.

Tom, my friend, I'll back on topic and answer you that there are still better optic performers available at the range 70-75mm than the latest Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM.

There are two lenses from Leica showing better performance @ f/2.8 that the latest Canon.

Leica's are still better.

"Performance on full-frame is very good; the lens is a little soft wide open,
and sharpness drops off a little towards the long end, but in its 'sweet spot' the lens
is impressively sharp on the 13Mp 5D test body from corner to corner.
As expected the optimum apertures tend to be F5.6-F11, however F16 and F22
are still perfectly usable, with diffraction softening only seriously impacting quality at F32."
DPReview-Studio Tests - 35mm full frame>>>

Here we go with MTF charts:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM>>>

Leica Summarit-S 70mm f/2.5 ASPH>>>

Leica Apo-Summicron M 75mm f/2.0 >>>>

What I wanted to say is that there are still better optics on the market than Canon L glass with their newest offer.

Also Canon DSLRs are not the best DSLR either.

My point is that somebody who look at the best image quality shouldn't lock yourself on just one lens or camera brand.

Zig-zag sort of intelligent drive between different lens brands (and mounts) or a freedom to choose whatever can fit best for your application is the only way or approach I will always recommend.

Universal interchangeable mount with the best sensor and recording compression that you can get is the future of digital still or moving images acquisition.

Hope that newest RED cameras EPIC/Scarlet can reach this goal soon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Off topic of this tread:

Dude, puh-leeeze.. The image quality just isn't there with the GH2. Sorry. I admit that I have not got my hands on one just yet, but I've used the G2 that came out a few months ago -- same sensor. I've seen a handful of stills from the GH2. I'll take a look at one when I get a chance. But there's no freaking way it can top the IQ of the 1Ds4, D3s or even the 5Dm2... Sorry. Not going to happen. It might have some better features for video, BFD.. If you're shooting time-lapse, the GH2 is nowhere near "the best". It lacks the sensor size, it lacks the DR, it has Panasonic's "Venus Engine" image processing which sucks monkey balls...

Jeff,

I don't understand what you are talking about???!!!

The image and video samples (without aliasing/moire!!!) from GH2 that I saw are pretty impressive for a DSLR that costs about 1000 Bucks.

Download GH2 video sample from Vimeo (pre-production model) >>>

Download GH2 image samples >>>

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 DIWA Lab Tests>>>

Also

Panasonic AG-AF100 with Nikon 14-24mm zoom, a crop image from this comparison test.

ALFA ROMEO RACING: 5DMK2 vs. Panasonic AG-AF100, an IMPRESSIVE video comparison and intercut test on Vimeo >>>

Supposed to be that GH2 and AG-AF100/101 have the same 4/3 sensor and GH2 just has more still photo camera features,

smaller/lighter body, more and longer shutter speed for time-lapse, etc...!!!!

I'm all the time watching this comparison example in loop on HP Dreamcolor 30bit wide gamut color monitor

at full screen (downloaded 1080p HD original video from Vimeo) and my eyes can't believe it.

Canon is definitely DEAD as a video DSLR!!!

Panasonic definitely kicked them out of the game!!!!

Tom, my friend, are you listening (and watching)???

 

[Michael Hastings]

Sanjin:

I think you are missing the point. While the 4/3 Panasonics may be the best of the vDSLRs for video because of many of the video related features (I have a hacked GH1 and they do have significant advantages for video over the canon's - IQ and lens related stuff like 10-1 zoom with video oriented IS, stepless iris, etc. But Tom and Pawel are talking time lapse, not video - ie a series of full resolution stills at extreme low light levels where the larger pixels really help.

 

[Mark Purnell]

This looks amazing was it shot with the image stabiliser on as this was timelapse of stills?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sanjin:

I think you are missing the point. While the 4/3 Panasonics may be the best of the vDSLRs for video because of many of the video related features (I have a hacked GH1 and they do have significant advantages for video over the canon's - IQ and lens related stuff like 10-1 zoom with video oriented IS, stepless iris, etc. But Tom and Pawel are talking time lapse, not video - ie a series of full resolution stills at extreme low light levels where the larger pixels really help.

Michael,

GH1 didn't have ny problem with timelapse:

Timelapse testing: Panasonic Lumix dmc-g1>>YouTube>>>

Now GH2 has got even more sensitivity and lower noise floor that means TL should be even better just because the testers said that GH2 has less noise than 5DMK2 at high ISO.

Tom already started to play Canon BIG guy that's not good for an artist suffered from Canon's limited range of FF35mm glass especially at wide angle and Pawel is anyway pretty much "hooked" himself to a certain brands...:bored:

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Once I applied the Adobe Camera RAW lens profile in ACR, the CA disappeared.

Tom, do you understand how/why this works? I made the mistake of shooting a timelapse with a Tamron lens, not the best quality selection, but it was the only lens I have with the focal length I wanted (a little odd at 40mm), and it is showing an annoying CA. I'm going to try this solution and hope it mitigates the problem - I doubt it will eliminate it entirely, but what is the logic/science behind it? Do you know?

I have an older copy of the 70-200mm and it is one of my fave lenses - no IS - do you think IS is even required for timelapse, since all of these shots are stabilized anyway? I don't really miss it, with this lens, and I think I get a little extra sharpness out of it.

 

[ericyoung]

This article has a review of Photoshop CS5 with some useful intro info on Lens Correction: http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/photoshop_cs5_review/

"CS5 can now use your image EXIF data to automatically correct for lens distortion, chromatic aberration, and vignetting. Photoshop includes a number of lens profiles for Canon and Nikon cameras, and Sigma is providing profiles for their lenses. You can also create your own by using the Adobe Lens Profile Creator tool (download from http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lensprofile_creator/).

Lens Correction is found in ACR under the Camera Calibration tab. You can tweak existing profiles with the Manual tab settings. Along with standard corrections for distortion and chromatic aberration, the Transform controls will also allow you to change perspective, rotation, and skew...."

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Have wondered already for some time whether a same kind of lens correction feature could be added into RED SDK and Redcine-X. That would be pretty useful. But guess the lens database included in Photoshop is created by Adobe. .... But if so, why couldn't they add the same feature to Premiere and After Effects? Need to start a new thread on this.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Tom, do you understand how/why this works? I made the mistake of shooting a timelapse with a Tamron lens, not the best quality selection, but it was the only lens I have with the focal length I wanted (a little odd at 40mm), and it is showing an annoying CA. I'm going to try this solution and hope it mitigates the problem - I doubt it will eliminate it entirely, but what is the logic/science behind it? Do you know?

I have an older copy of the 70-200mm and it is one of my fave lenses - no IS - do you think IS is even required for timelapse, since all of these shots are stabilized anyway? I don't really miss it, with this lens, and I think I get a little extra sharpness out of it.

Yes, the CA correction in the lens profiles of CS5 ACR should be able to kill the CA. Just test different strengths, fringe removal, etc. One fear with this type of correction, just like any other (sharpening, noise reduction) is whether ACR will apply the changes evenly over 300 frames or whatever. Just test it and pixel peep it.

It's hard for me to say regarding the older non IS 70-200 vs this new one. All I can say is that this lens is the sharpest I have ever used, including the Nikon 14-24. Maybe something to consider is how you will use these lenses on Epic. Seems like the Red guys love this 70-200 II if that is any indication.

 

[Andrew Wilding]

Leica S2 produces more noise at ISO 640 than a 747-400 at take off. At ISO 1250 the noise is probably brighter than the Milky Way itself.

:biggrin:

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Seems like the Red guys love this 70-200 II if that is any indication.

Tom, my friend, I wouldn't say like that.

Read this:

"I see some minor chromatic aberration around a couple of high-contrast whiskers at the edge of the frame,
and I turn to Jim and say something like, “well, this is no good, look at this horrible chromatic aberration.” Jim looks shocked, then worried,
until I assure him I’m winding him up; if the worst thing I can see in the image is some insignificant
subpixel CA (an artifact of the Canon 70-200 zoom, not a sensor problem), then the image must be pretty good. Jim relaxes, and asks Deanan to play the clip."

RED Visit, 21 September: EPIC! by Adam Wilt >>>

With the newest Leica's you don't get so often this CA as a sort of "optical embarrassment" when you blow up your image for a huge print or even at 4K digital projection.

Have a look at my latest tread here>>>

 

[ericyoung]

"...insignificant subpixel CA..." is hardly an optical embarrassment, and in a ZOOM lens at that!

But this thread is just getting too pixel peeping for me ... :smile:

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

It's hard for me to say regarding the older non IS 70-200 vs this new one. All I can say is that this lens is the sharpest I have ever used, including the Nikon 14-24. Maybe something to consider is how you will use these lenses on Epic. Seems like the Red guys love this 70-200 II if that is any indication.

Thanks Tom and Eric, for the helpful responses...Lauri, your idea of building RED-specific camera profiles is quite interesting - I wonder if this would be one of those ideas which The Foundry would take up for including in Storm - you should re-post it to Paul Clements' thread where he reviews Storm - the Foundry guys seem very responsive on that thread to suggestions.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Tom already started to play Canon BIG guy that's not good for an artist suffered from Canon's limited range of FF35mm glass especially at wide angle...

Lol, what? SJ, you know I'm sponsored by Canon, right? They sent me $30,000 worth of gear for my film. So I'm quite happy with Canon right now! I'm not going to kick them in the shins and start using Nikon gear on this film.