Hi folks,
Thought a few people might be interested in this.
I was debating with myself whether to buy the f/2.8 or f/4 70-200, I already owned an older f/2.8 version so decided to shoot a bunch of shots at both settings and compare them after a little bit of PP.
My concern was the DOF and background blur would not be as good at f/4, I didn't care much about the exposure speed.
Once I'd finished PP'ing 4 crappy shots from around the house (in the attached PDF) I could honestly couldn't tell the images apart, which gave me the confidence to buy the far lighter lens without feeling I was loosing some artistic quality to the images, I'm glad I did this to get the difference in context.
http://www1.zippyshare.com/v/44694857/file.html
Obviously there are other benefits to the 2.8 in terms of shutter speed and build quality, but these are matterless to me.
Cheers,
Rich
Thought a few people might be interested in this.
I was debating with myself whether to buy the f/2.8 or f/4 70-200, I already owned an older f/2.8 version so decided to shoot a bunch of shots at both settings and compare them after a little bit of PP.
My concern was the DOF and background blur would not be as good at f/4, I didn't care much about the exposure speed.
Once I'd finished PP'ing 4 crappy shots from around the house (in the attached PDF) I could honestly couldn't tell the images apart, which gave me the confidence to buy the far lighter lens without feeling I was loosing some artistic quality to the images, I'm glad I did this to get the difference in context.
http://www1.zippyshare.com/v/44694857/file.html
Obviously there are other benefits to the 2.8 in terms of shutter speed and build quality, but these are matterless to me.
Cheers,
Rich
