C300: Canon CN-E Primes compared to 70-200/2.8 II L IS?

K

Kholi

Section Moderator
Has anyone done a comparison between CN-E primes and the 70-200/2.8 II?

THe zoom is incredible, the 24-70/2.8 II absolutely does not match it, and I'm not sure if any of the other L set will (from testing only two of the other primes).

I'm wondering if whatever mojo's going on in the 70-200 exists in the CN-E lineup.
 
I haven't done a direct comparison, but I own the 85mm CN-E and the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II - so I can do a bit of a comparison. What would you like to see? Both lenses at 85mm f2.8, I presume. On a C300 or 5d Mark III (in stills or raw video mode)?

I agree that the 70-200 might be the finest lens Canon has ever made, and would like to see how it stacks up to their Cinema offerings.
 
cowpunk52 said:
I haven't done a direct comparison, but I own the 85mm CN-E and the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II - so I can do a bit of a comparison. What would you like to see? Both lenses at 85mm f2.8, I presume. On a C300 or 5d Mark III (in stills or raw video mode)?

I agree that the 70-200 might be the finest lens Canon has ever made, and would like to see how it stacks up to their Cinema offerings.
Click to expand...

Oh that would be THE perfect comparison.

Literally just some skin, bokeh. C300 because of the cropped sensor, that would be really great. 2.8 and 4 if you have the time, and a close up and medium.

It's been bugging me for a pair of weeks now, I can't believe how insane that lens is. It's got more character and punch than a lot of cinema zooms.
 
I would imagine that it wouldn't be a fair comparison. Wouldn't the CNE at 2.8 be closer to optimal aperture?
 
Samir Patel said:
I would imagine that it wouldn't be a fair comparison. Wouldn't the CNE at 2.8 be closer to optimal aperture?
Click to expand...

Yes, it would definitely be unfair for the 85mm CN-E (only partially joking).

If the CN-E has similar mojo but looks BETTER at 2.8, then I'm likely going to have to start using this glass. That would be insane to have an entire range that has the same look as the 70-200/2.8 II.

Wide open, the thing is still sharp, color's great, 2.8~4 it's even better and it feels like by 4~5.6 it's at its best.
 
cowpunk52 said:
Ok - here's the comparison:

http://imgur.com/a/i5Knu#0

And my thoughts are here:

http://briancweed.com/blog/2013/9/11/comparison-canons-70-200mm-f28-l-is-ii-vs-85mm-t13-cn-e
Click to expand...

I agree with what you're seeing, looks like the zoom does have a red cast to it, and the CN-E's are just a HAIR more contrasty.

The cool thing is that they do seem to match, which means it's time to bring a set in for testing AND you have an extended range in a cheaper rental option if you need it.

I've tried the Fujinon 19-90, Angenieux Rouge pair... The Fuji definitely has that updated digital look to it, Angenieux's are warm, not bad... but not as "magical" as that 70-200.

... I wonder what happens when you put a wide angle or anamorphic adapter on the 70-200. xD Just halfway joking.

Thanks SO much for doing this so quickly.
 
Thanks Brian! Nice!

Well, when you consider that the 70-200 has pretty constant performance over the range, you get quite a few T2.9 cinema primes in that range for a good price!

=)

Also, what is the price of that Zeiss 70-200mm compact zoom again?
 
AndreeOnline said:
Thanks Brian! Nice!

Well, when you consider that the 70-200 has pretty constant performance over the range, you get quite a few T2.9 cinema primes in that range for a good price!

=)

Also, what is the price of that Zeiss 70-200mm compact zoom again?
Click to expand...

And if you're shooting a camera with an active Canon mount, you get IS at 200mm. Definitely not a cinema build, but has some great use.
 
Kholi said:
And if you're shooting a camera with an active Canon mount, you get IS at 200mm. Definitely not a cinema build, but has some great use.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the IS is worth it's weight in gold - it's definitely spoiled me for long lens work. Probably the biggest reason to not do a cinema mod on the lens is losing the IS.
 
I LOVE that zoom, i own it, and i use it constantly for inteviews. BUT it really doesnt match anything else that canon makes. It has a completely different look. Or then again, maybe my it's 2 c300 bodies that don't match.
 
NewYorkLion said:
I LOVE that zoom, i own it, and i use it constantly for inteviews. BUT it really doesnt match anything else that canon makes. It has a completely different look. Or then again, maybe my it's 2 c300 bodies that don't match.
Click to expand...

No, it really doesn't match anything else, aside from the 100/2.8 Macro I suspect.

It looks like it does kind of match the CN-E's... I hope, anyway. To have glass that looks like that at every focal length. =O

For what it's worth, though, I've noticed that the Sigma 18-35 can at least match it in overall performance, and it's not too hard to match the color in post. I need to try a very weak low contrast filter on the Sigma, might help.
 
The 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM lens is perhaps the cheapest and sharpest 4k ready lens available in that focal length range. I have been using it for the last three years for photography as well as filming. The IS is very good and I won't trade it ever for cine lens ergonomics. I even use it with 1.4x and 2x TC. http://www.indiawilds.com/diary/canon-70-200-f2-8-l-is-ii-usm-review/

I have heard lot of praise about the CN-E 30-300 and am wondering how much better it is than the 70-200 2.8 L IS II lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top