Comparison of 70-200mm Lenses
Nov 12, 2021 08:01:09 #
Tony Northrup has a good video comparing Canon, Fuji, Nikon, and Sony 70-200mm lenses. Interesting results. I won't give away the results, but money talks.
Nov 12, 2021 10:54:23 #
I saw it. I don't always agree with the Northrup's, but they do produce good videos and that one was pretty good.
Nov 12, 2021 13:48:35 #
Nov 12, 2021 14:55:38 #
Got thru the first 3 minutes and there was so much misinformation (the Fuji f2.8 is really an F4 because of the “crop factor and it gathers less light” and it’s weight shows over 3lbs although it’s actually ~2Lbs, weighing the lenses + the bodies and still gettin it wrong, etc, etc…) that I was too put off to continue. It’s basically flawed from the beginning, because the different bodies the lenses are tested with have different resolutions, different settings (contrast, mode, etc) and none of this is spelled out. He also compares one crop camera to three FFs and apparently thinks this is an apples-to-apples comparison. TN needs to take an entry level college course on experimental design and handling variables. GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).
Nov 12, 2021 21:09:21 #
UTMike wrote:
No link?
If he had posted a link the admin. would have moved it to "links and resources" and many would miss it. I made that mistake myself once.
Nov 13, 2021 06:57:54 #
cmc4214
Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania
TriX wrote:
Got thru the first 3 minutes and there was so much... (show quote)
I've watched only two of his videos That was enough!
Nov 13, 2021 07:42:27 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
jerryc41 wrote:
Tony Northrup has a good video comparing Canon, Fuji, Nikon, and Sony 70-200mm lenses. Interesting results. I won't give away the results, but money talks.
That would be Tony Northrup's interpretation. I actually shoot with mine, and mine is the sharpest 70-200 I have ever shot with. Proof is in the pudding Tony, not in your video's. The answer lies in my screen name.
Nov 13, 2021 07:50:49 #
photon-collector
Loc: Tampa Bay Area, Florida
billnikon wrote:
That would be Tony Northrup's interpretation. I actually shoot with mine, and mine is the sharpest 70-200 I have ever shot with. Proof is in the pudding Tony, not in your video's. The answer lies in my screen name.
I also get remarkable images from the Nikkor 70-200.
In fact, I have come down to the 24-70, 70-200, and 200-500 for incredibly sharp images.
Nov 13, 2021 07:57:37 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
photon-collector wrote:
I also get remarkable images from the Nikkor 70-200.
In fact, I have come down to the 24-70, 70-200, and 200-500 for incredibly sharp images.
In fact, I have come down to the 24-70, 70-200, and 200-500 for incredibly sharp images.
I have used the 200-500 over the years for wildlife photography, excellent lens at an incredible value. Below is a stunned Iguana in the water after a rare frost in Florida, after it warmed up, he unfortunately recovered.
Nov 13, 2021 08:04:11 #
In this day and age any 3x zoom which cannot compete well with a prime can easily be bettered. 
Nov 13, 2021 08:18:11 #
billnikon wrote:
I have used the 200-500 over the years for wildlife photography, excellent lens at an incredible value. Below is a stunned Iguana in the water after a rare frost in Florida, after it warmed up, he unfortunately recovered.
Nice shot, but "unfortunately" recovered?
Nov 13, 2021 09:02:49 #
TriX wrote:
Got thru the first 3 minutes and there was so much... (show quote)
He iseems to be all about misdirection - sometimes deliberate to cause controversy and increase clicks - and sometimes it's just ignorance + arrogance. Either way, it's entertaining, but not a good source for info when making a purchasing decision.
Nov 13, 2021 09:03:37 #
mikegreenwald
Loc: Illinois
LFingar wrote:
Nice shot, but "unfortunately" recovered?
Yes, "unfortunately" is the right word. If you've ever dealt with these messy and destructive creatures, introduced and free of natural enemies, you would understand.
Nov 13, 2021 09:09:17 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
LFingar wrote:
Nice shot, but "unfortunately" recovered?
It's a Florida thing.
Nov 13, 2021 09:22:05 #
TriX wrote:
Got thru the first 3 minutes and there was so much... (show quote)
I agree T&C are quick to post click-bait to make money, but have lost all their due diligence on proper scientific research techniques and skip over important settings, important facts, etc. in a rush to post more content. I don't take them seriously anymore.
I used to watch them every week, but it is just entertainment now. They have gotten it wrong with so many reviews and comparisons due to their lack of proper attention to details, variables and skipping the facts.
Cheers
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.