Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Tools tab: Arrow points to lens VIEWED, right?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    147

    Canon 70-200 2.8 vs. Nikon 70-200 2.8 in TOOLS

    I had somehow never noticed the lens comparisons in the TOOLS section until this week. I am a little confused as to its operation, however. The first time I looked at it, I was thinking the Nikon version of the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark 2 looked better in the ISO 12233 than the Canon. Tonight I looked again and realized I might just have had it backwards.
    Does the little white arrow point to the side being seen at the moment? I had first assumed it was the opposite; that you manipulate the arrow to change the view. One of the lenses is clearly blurry-er and has more CA.

    Having just purchased the Canon version, outspending the price of my Canon body by a factor of 4, I do hope the blurry one is the NIKON and not the CANON.
    Last edited by Scott Stephen; 05-06-2012 at 05:11 AM.
    Canon 6D, Canon T3i, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art"; Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 24-105 f/4 L ; Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, EF 85 f/1.8; Canon 1.4x TC Mk. 3; 3x Phottix Mitros+ flashes

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    778
    Arrow points to the camera and lens currently showing. Hope that helps. Sometimes it takes awhile to load fully though.
    Words get in the way of what I meant to say.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,398
    Yes, it points at the side you are looking at.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    147
    Ahhh. Buyer's remorse subsiding... Serenity returning... Perspective restored.
    I assume everyone would agree that based on the ISO comparison tool on this site, then, the Canon beats the Nikon? (Yes, different bodies = apples vs. oranges)
    Canon 6D, Canon T3i, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art"; Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 24-105 f/4 L ; Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, EF 85 f/1.8; Canon 1.4x TC Mk. 3; 3x Phottix Mitros+ flashes

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,398
    I am sure Canon vs Nikon would be debatable.
    Since I have a small fortune invested in Canon gear, I am gonna say yes Canon wins.

    On another note, you bought the best zoom Canon makes. You shouldn't be disappointed.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Stephen View Post
    I assume everyone would agree that based on the ISO comparison tool on this site, then, the Canon beats the Nikon?
    That's my view. Looks like Canons are generally sharper and with fewer aberrations. I anguished over them (as well as a variety of other lens tests) for a while before I made the switch to Nikon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Stephen View Post
    (Yes, different bodies = apples vs. oranges)
    Yes, different bodies as well as raw conversions. It's possible to mount Nikon lenses on Canon bodies (though not vice-versa), so an apples-to-apples comparison could be done -- I think it would be very interesting.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    275
    That would be a really interesting thing to do. I do have a Nikon to Canon adaptor already so I can use some older lenses at work. Would anyone on this mostly Canon forum have current models of Nikon lenses to match up with their Canon glass though?

    Think any of your local camera shop owners might be curious enough to try anything like this?

    Any lens rental places maybe?

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    147
    If comparisons can be made valid or nearly so, I think there could be no better single lens-to-lens comparison than comparing their respective Mk2 versions of their 70-200 IS f/2.8 lenses. Canon sites do go on about their version. I can't speak for how Nikonians feel about theirs, but it would be an interesting comparison.
    Canon 6D, Canon T3i, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art"; Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 24-105 f/4 L ; Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, EF 85 f/1.8; Canon 1.4x TC Mk. 3; 3x Phottix Mitros+ flashes

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    275
    That really is a bread and butter lens for many photographers. 35, 50, 85, 135 would also be good selections as well as longer macro lenses. Am becoming curious about this and am starting to think about talking to owner of my local shop to see if he might allow using a few lenses in the store to find out what happens.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Stephen View Post
    If comparisons can be made valid or nearly so, I think there could be no better single lens-to-lens comparison than comparing their respective Mk2 versions of their 70-200 IS f/2.8 lenses. Canon sites do go on about their version. I can't speak for how Nikonians feel about theirs, but it would be an interesting comparison.
    A post/submission like that WOULD get read a lot, to be sure.
    Canon 6D, Canon T3i, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art"; Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, Canon 24-105 f/4 L ; Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, EF 85 f/1.8; Canon 1.4x TC Mk. 3; 3x Phottix Mitros+ flashes

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •