\nf\/2.8L IS version I<\/a><\/strong><\/td>\n
\nAF-S VR f\/2.8G ED-IF version I<\/a><\/strong><\/td>\n
\nAF-S f\/2.8G ED VRII – version II<\/a><\/strong><\/td>\n
\nf\/2.8G<\/a><\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
white<\/td>\n
“4EV OIS”<\/p>\n
white<\/p>\n
MF ring wider and easier to us than previous<\/td>\n
\nit presumably was designed for in 2002.<\/p>\n
“3EV OIS”; 3 AF stop buttons.<\/td>\n
\nas well but subject to veiling flare.<\/p>\n
double-image gives poor bokeh at close focus distances.<\/p>\n
substantially changes angle of view which gets wider as you focus
\ncloser! Thus at closest focus of 1.4m, the focal length is actually 160mm
\nnot 200mm!<\/p>\n
“4EV OIS VRII”<\/td>\n
\nwith 2x TC<\/td>\n
520mm on Canon 1D<\/p>\n
640mm on APS-C<\/td>\n
520mm on Canon 1D<\/p>\n
640mm on APS-C<\/td>\n
600mm on DX<\/td>\n
600mm on DX<\/td>\n
600mm on DX<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
For further comparison, the Olympus ZD 50-200mm f\/2.8-3.5 SWD lens<\/strong>, is also weather-proofed, has a tripod mount, has 3-4EV IS via in-body IS on most Olympus dSLRs, is MUCH cheaper<\/strong> (~$US1000), is MUCH lighter<\/strong> (1kg not 1.5kg), is shorter<\/strong> (a manageable 15.7cm instead of 20-22cm), uses a smaller, cheaper filter (67mm not 77mm), has 9 rounded diaphragm blades for nice bokeh, and has more than twice the macro performance and twice the telephoto reach (can even use it hand held at reach of 800mm f\/7 with a 2x teleconverter)<\/strong>, making it MY preferred zoom lens<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Although dpreview has not tested the ZD 50-200mm, it has been tested with a different system at lenstip<\/a> and wide open it was much better than the Canon 70-200mm f\/2.8 on a Canon 20D<\/a> – with their MTF50 readings giving 41-44 for the ZD in the centre vs only 31-39 for the Canon in the centre, and the ZD was 32-37 at the edge, while the Canon was a much worse 26-29. Their tests for CA showed worst result was 0.11% at 120mm for the ZD and 0.055% at 200mm, while it was 0.085% at 200mm for the Canon. Both lenses showed some astigmatism. The ZD had the least light fall off across the image and had MUCH less flare and ghosting shooting into the sun. Their tests of the Sigma 70-200mm f\/2.8 II gave similar resolution wide open to the Canon. I was not able to find their tests of the Nikon 70-200mm vI lens although it apparently was the best of these tested when used on a D200 DX sensor.<\/p>\n Some examples of my photos<\/strong> taken with the ZD 50-200mm lens are here<\/a> and with a 2x TC are here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Of course, Olympus users also have the option of the superb but expensive and heavy Olympus ZD 35-100mm f\/2.0 lens <\/strong>which, in 35mm full frame terms, gives the focal length reach of a 70-200mm lens but light gathering of an f\/2.0 lens and depth of field of an f\/4 lens- which at maximum telephoto is perfect for most situations.<\/p>\n Furthermore, it should be pointed out that high quality prime lenses are even better than the zoom lenses for optical image quality – for example, the new Canon 100mm f\/2.8L USM hybrid IS macro<\/a> is even sharper than the previous sharpest lens tested on dpreview (the Olympus ZD 50mm f\/2.0 macro<\/strong>), and wide open at f\/2.8 it gives MTF 50 of 2000 in the centre and 1500 at the edge with a CA < 0.03%, 1.7EV light falloff and only trivial pincushion – easily beating any of the 70-200mm zooms.<\/p>\n Here is a delightful, quick candid portrait I snuck in while this young lady was having her face painted at a cricket match – taken with the Canon 1D Mark III with EF 135mm f\/2.0 L lens and 1.4x TC for very shallow DOF – actually, too shallow for portraits, but didn’t have time to close the aperture down a notch or two (my ZD 50-200mm was attached to 2x TC and my Gh-1 on a tripod in the stadium taking shots of the cricket game):<\/p>\n
![\"Lily\"](\"http:\/\/www.ayton.id.au\/gary\/photos\/sports\/cricket2010\/2K0C3902.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"