FS5: 70-200 len choices

S

snapdragon

Member
Hi all,

I'm looking at a 70-200 lens for my FS5, and I've come down to two choices; the Sony 70-200 f4 and the Canon 70-200 f4 IS.

The Canon lens is about $500 cheaper where I live, so I'm leaning towards that. However I'm a bit concerned about the fly-by-wire focus system that both lenses seem to use.. especially after putting up with the horrible manual focus on the Sony 18-105 kit lens.

So, just after some opinions from those that have used these lenses before. Pros, cons, how good is the manual focus operation, do the lenses work well with the FS5, etc.

Thanks in advance for any info. Much appreciated :)
 
The Nikkor 80-200 f4 AIS is one of the best manual telephoto zooms you can buy.

The Sony f4 is junk and has no better image quality than the superzoom 18-200. I bought one and sent it back, it's very disappointing for video work.
 
Last edited:
I like both the Canon and Nikons f4 zooms

(I had the non IS canon, I have the nikon)

The Canon focuses the 'right way' and may talk to the camera better than the nikon.

Neither have the silky manual focus of my 50-300 nikkor manual - by far my lens of choice in this range.

There is a Canon FD 50-300 too if you want to swing that way.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Neither have the silky manual focus of my 50-300 nikkor manual - by far my lens of choice in this range.
Click to expand...

The focus on the 80-200 f4 AIs I have is no different to any of my other AIs lenses although I have had a couple of bad ones before I got this mint copy. I had a bit of slop in one and the other was rather too stiff even after servicing.

One should also point out the 80-200 is a fraction of the size of that rocket launcher style thing you use ! ;)
 
Last edited:
Nirv said:
The focus on the 80-200 f4 AIs I have is no different to any of my other AIs lenses although I have had a couple of bad ones before I got this mint copy.

One should also point out the 80-200 is a fraction of the size of that rocket launcher style thing you use ! ;)
Click to expand...

I meant that the Manual lens, has better focus than this
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-200mm-f4.htm
or this
http://www.canon.co.uk/lenses/ef-70-200mm-f-4l-usm-lens/

Both are pretty good for modern lenses but not great.
 
I have the canon 70-200 f4 with IS. I can report standard DSLR lens focusing, not nearly as annoying as the 18-105 kit lens.

It's a pretty decent lens with the speed booster on s35 sony cams. Nice and light too, no need for lens support.

I'd say splurge and get the IS, it makes a noticeable difference if you end up using this lens handheld. One memorable time for me was shooting boxing in high frame rate from the corner of the ring, getting tights on faces and gloves hitting them. the IS was great there.
 
I have the canon 70-200 IS f4 with the metabones speedbooster, a lovely lens. But the biggest con for me is the noise it makes when OS is on, it's quite considerable. If you don't need audio recorded from anywhere near the camera then you'll be fine. But it would make internal and attached shotgun mic audio unusable.
 
Thanks guys! Really helpful so far.

I should note that I'm not really interested in Nikon lenses purely because I don't have an adapter.

Wes - good to know you think the Canon 70-200 manual focus works well, thanks.
 
mattjeh said:
I have the canon 70-200 IS f4 with the metabones speedbooster, a lovely lens. But the biggest con for me is the noise it makes when OS is on, it's quite considerable. If you don't need audio recorded from anywhere near the camera then you'll be fine. But it would make internal and attached shotgun mic audio unusable.
Click to expand...

That's disappointing to hear. I know my Sony 18-105 lens has silent OS. Wonder if the Sony 70-200 is the same..
 
by personal experience for Canon only: the 70-200/f4 is a great lens. Razor sharp with f4.
Pro compared to Sony: with a Speedbooster you get a 50-140/f2.8. If you want to sell it Canon has a greater market than the Sony
Con: you need an adapter which makes it not very cheaper than the Sony in total
 
Last edited:
snapdragon said:
Hi all,

I'm looking at a 70-200 lens for my FS5, and I've come down to two choices; the Sony 70-200 f4 and the Canon 70-200 f4 IS.

The Canon lens is about $500 cheaper where I live, so I'm leaning towards that. However I'm a bit concerned about the fly-by-wire focus system that both lenses seem to use.. especially after putting up with the horrible manual focus on the Sony 18-105 kit lens.

So, just after some opinions from those that have used these lenses before. Pros, cons, how good is the manual focus operation, do the lenses work well with the FS5, etc.

Thanks in advance for any info. Much appreciated :)
Click to expand...

At least with the Canon, it's not 'fly-by-wire', so when you are manually focusing, it's not an encoder moving the focus optics with servos like on the 85L and some others, but there are no hard stops or set reference/witness marks tied to the focus barrel.

Why are you considering a 70-200 f/4 instead of the 2.8? Is it just cost savings or does the weight play into it, too? The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II is kind of a staple in the s35 sensor cam world and an excellent performer. It's not cheap, but it IS a great lens optically, built like a tank and not a purchase that you would regret.
 
Run&Gun said:
2.8? ..built like a tank and not a purchase that you would regret.
Click to expand...

Honestly I dont think 70-200 2.8 are built like tanks at all. They fall apart, mainly the stupid little plastic cogs/motors, not the housing, both Canon and Nikon, (and Stigma) don't know why but 70-200 2.8 lenses generally cause a heap of problems.. wierdly 70-200 F4 lenses dont.

My personal experience (about 6 brokne 70-200s knocking about my office in the last 6 years) is backed up with this blog..
'70-200 f/2.8 lenses are likely to fail no matter who makes them.' https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/08/lensrentals-repair-data-2012-2013/
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
Honestly I dont think 70-200 2.8 are built like tanks at all. They fall apart, mainly the stupid little plastic cogs/motors, not the housing, both Canon and Nikon, (and Stigma) don't know why but 70-200 2.8 lenses generally cause a heap of problems.. wierdly 70-200 F4 lenses dont.

My personal experience (about 6 brokne 70-200s knocking about my office in the last 6 years) is backed up with this blog..
'70-200 f/2.8 lenses are likely to fail no matter who makes them.' https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/08/lensrentals-repair-data-2012-2013/
Click to expand...


I have seen Rogers article, but in my real world experience, it's been rock solid and I don't recall a single still photog I know mentioning any issues and I shoot with a ton of guys in one of the WORST environments in the world for gear, NASCAR. Plus NFL and other pro sports. And none of the guys I know personally using these for video work has had any reliability issues, either. I will say, though, that most video guys treat their gear A LOT better than most still photogs. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. It's a wonder any still photog has ANY piece of gear that works longer than a week.

Again, not doubting anyone else's experiences, and If I had experienced those issues myself, I know my opinion would be different, but I haven't seen any of the problems myself or immediately around me.
 
Run&Gun said:
And none of the guys I know personally using these for video work has had any reliability issues, either.
Click to expand...

To some extent the motion guys are newbs to these lenses.. no one was using them for motion before 2008. Ive been battling generations of 70-200, 80-200s from 1994.. and yes Ive employed two staff stills togs guys who were treating the kit like complete sh_it - court, sport, beach. But most of my other lenses in fact all of them apart from my 600/4 (broken plastic motors) have withstood the abuse.

Agreed - I don't dispute your personal experience :)
 
Last edited:
I have the Canon Mark II 70-200 f2.8 IS and I highly recommend this lens. It's considered by many as one of the best lenses Canon has ever made and I have to agree - it's an incredible zoom lens capable of such beautiful images. It's a bit big, but I came up with my own lens support that hangs from the top handle instead of rails to keep off the clutter.

F4 is not bright enough for Run and Gun IMO. F2.8 is the minimum for night shooting or low light. That extra stop in dark situations makes a world of difference.
 
I picked up the new Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 and I really like it. It is big, but I feel like f/2 (with a speed booster) is sometimes needed. On my a6300, it focuses really fast. And the IS, like most Tamrons, is really, really good. There are 3 IS modes on the G2, but mode 1 for video is really good. For photos, mode 3 can get you a really slow shutter speed. Tamron has really been stepping up their game, a lot like Sigma.
 
BarryLichtner said:
I picked up the new Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 and I really like it. It is big, but I feel like f/2 (with a speed booster) is sometimes needed. On my a6300, it focuses really fast. And the IS, like most Tamrons, is really, really good. There are 3 IS modes on the G2, but mode 1 for video is really good. For photos, mode 3 can get you a really slow shutter speed. Tamron has really been stepping up their game, a lot like Sigma.
Click to expand...

Does that Tamron lens focus and zoom in normal direction like canon lenses? I much dislike the sigma 24-105 for it's placement of the zoom and focus rings. An otherwise total winner over it's canon counterpart to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top