, , , , ,

Being eager to try out the 70-200 f2.8 lens, I managed to squeezed out time of my abit tight schedule to go for “The Games Xpo” event held at Singapore Expo Hall 5 which ended a couple of hours ago.

Shooting subjects are mainly cosplayers or babes at the booths…

*I must say that, this lens is heavy if you are not using it and is in your shoulder bag. If it’s in your backpack, it probably won’t be that heavy.*

For this event, the 70-200 was my main lens. I shot nearly all photos using this lens (only a handful of snapshots was shot using my Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS HSM).

*I actually do not think that this lens is heavy. But I think the main reason is, I do get quite a bit of rest in-between shots that I can side sling my camera.. If you are going to keep holding to this camera, you would likely be tired after 15 minutes.*

I used to wonder what makes people who used L lens says that it’s a class of it’s own. But after using one, I finally understood… But of course, I’m comparing a cheap lens (EF-S 55-250) to an expensive one (EF 70-200 f2.8L IS II).

As mentioned in my previous post about my findings/feelings when I first bought it and reviewing the photos from the Camera LCD.. The contrast, colors and the 2 stop exposure are on a totally different class than the 55-250. But there was also another factor which I did not really see a difference in the LCD was sharpness…. *well, everything looks darn sharp on the back of Camera LCD screens…*

Today, I went on to do a “real-world” shoot… When I was shooting around today, I think I got carried away by the bokeh this lens gives me… I shot everything wide open at f2.8…

It was after the event when I start to load up the photos to Lightroom, then I got so impressed by this lens….

The sharpness straight out of camera (SOOC) is so damn sharp. I used to add alot of adjustments to my 55-250. Adjustments such as sharpening (probably too much) just to make it sharp enough … But this lens was able to capture it sharp WIDE OPEN without the sharpening adjustments.

Not forgetting the other factors like Contrasts, micro details and Colour reproduction that this new baby does waaaay better than my 55-250

Below are some of the shots I got today. Various adjustments are made (to my liking…), but NO additional sharpening added to it (instead, I had to reduce the clarity to hide some of the sharpness)

Export - IMG_3186

Export - IMG_3199

Export - IMG_3292

Export - IMG_3314
*Overall, I spent way lesser time processing the photos to get to my liking as compared to my 55-250. I believe the main time savings was from lesser work required for exposure/contrast boost, noise reduction and Sharpening*

I will try to do a SOOC (JPEG) comparison of this lens vs my previously used 55-250 in a real world shoot (hopefully) sometime soon.. But probably this time round I will be shooting either landscape, sunrise or probably sunset. As under these conditions, we can be using f8 ~ f16 to make it more “fair” for 55-250 which max aperture goes to only f4 at it’s widest end.

At the end of the field test

I’m really glad that I bought this lens… thou I’m still feeling abit guilty getting it, but lesser now. It’s definitely a super duper upgrade to my 55-250 to all aspect of image quality (Sharpness, Contrast, Micro details, Colours) but at the expense of weight and size.

Not too concerned about the weight (at least at the moment), but while using this lens at this event, occasionally, this lens will knock into someone’s head (because I’m shooting right above their shoulders -_-). Also when your camera is at rest position, you will need a slightly bigger space to pull it up as it’s actually quite long (especially so when you mount the hood too. Aprox 26?cm with hood)

This section is for those wondering why I got this lens over 3rd party options like Sigma and Tamron..

Before I bought this lens, I did have thoughts of getting 3rd party offerings from them due to cost reasons.

But I decided to buy the Canon one instead even though it’s almost 50% more expensive than a 3rd party offering. One of the key reasons being, superior optics. I’m not saying that Sigma or Tamron is bad, but rather, from most reviews, most says that the Canon one better, sharper etc..  But I did not test them all out before, so I can’t make any comparisons. But I didn’t want any regrets, so I went in with my heart instead of my head…and got the Canon version..