The "New Gear/Willy Waving" thread

New 10 stop for the new UWA. :D

SAM_0150s_zps696be0f1.jpg~original
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
The thing is for the most part the glass required to correct for aberration at 200mm f2.0 is the same as at 400mm f/4.0. Aberrations are inherently linked to the physical aperture and not the F number, the F number is not indicative of the underlying complexity because it is just a ratio and not a physical measurement. A 600mm f4.0 lens is much more complex to design than a 85mm f/1.8 desperate the f-number difference.

The fact that you say a variable aperture zoom is best left to the consumer zooms is precisely the reason why no one does this for high end zooms because marketing is drilling in the fact that fixed aperture zooms are superior. They aren't, a fixed aperture zoom is an artificially compromised lens that has been forced to be slower than the aperture allows just so the aperture stays constant and it can be marketed as such. Fixed aperture zooms were handy before automatic exposure but now is completely redundant (and can be solved by a simple switch). Variable aperture is what a zoom lens should naturally be, a fixed aperture lens has been forced mechanically not to open to the widest aperture.
Click to expand...

You have a 200-400 f/4 corrected for f/4 @ 200mm which is £9k, to correct it for f/2 @ 200mm is going to be expensive and heavy. These superteles were made to be used wide open and if it was plausible to use them at variable apertures someone would have made one. The Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS looks to be your best bet if you want a more professional variable aperture zoom and even that was about £1500 at launch. I use the 200 f/2 with TCs which can take it to a 280 f/2.8, 340 f3.4 or 400 f/4 so the versatility is there while keeping the weight, complexity and price down at an acceptable level.
 
Above&Beyond said:
You have a 200-400 f/4 corrected for f/4 @ 200mm which is £9k, to correct it for f/2 @ 200mm is going to be expensive and heavy. These superteles were made to be used wide open and if it was plausible to use them at variable apertures someone would have made one. The Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS looks to be your best bet if you want a more professional variable aperture zoom and even that was about £1500 at launch. I use the 200 f/2 with TCs which can take it to a 280 f/2.8, 340 f3.4 or 400 f/4 so the versatility is there while keeping the weight, complexity and price down at an acceptable level.
Click to expand...

No, the 200-400mm f/4.0 already has most of the necessary optics to correct aberrations at 200mm f/2.0 because it is more or less the same thing. So there is no more weight or expense to add.

You have to realize that variable aperture is the natural unmodified functionality of a zoom lens in its most basic form, a fixed aperture zoom has been purposely and artificially limited by a mechanical coupling to prevent the lens opening up to its widest aperture at the shorter focal lengths. There is nothing special about a fixed aperture zoom, it has just been contained not to fully utilize the light gathering potential of the front element when not used at the far tele end.

Secondly telephoto lens complexity is related to the physical aperture size and the diameter of the front element, the actual f-number is irrelevant.
Instead of thinking about correcting a 400mm lens at f/4.0 and a 200mm lens at f/2.0, you need to be thinking about correcting a lens with a 100mm aperture.

The fact that the 200mm /f2.0 lens behaves so well with TCs up to 400mm f/4.0 is just proof that that a 200-400mm f/2.0-f/4.0 is perfectly feasible with little added cost or complexity.

The new Nikon 80-400mm AF-S is another great example of allowing a zoom lens to utilize the aperture of the front element at wider focal lengths. It is more or less as sharp as the 200-400 but a stop slower at 400mm, less so at the wide end.


My eyes are on Sigma making a variable aperture 200-400mm f/2.8-f/4.0 or perhaps a 200-500mm /f3.5-f/5.6.

Both Nikon and Sigma have released F/2.8-f/4.0 variable aperture zooms at shorter focal length requiring retro-focus designs. A variable aperture telephoto is much simpler than that!
 
D.P. said:
No, the 200-400mm f/4.0 already has most of the necessary optics to correct aberrations at 200mm f/2.0 because it is more or less the same thing. So there is no more weight or expense to add.

You have to realize that variable aperture is the natural unmodified functionality of a zoom lens in its most basic form, a fixed aperture zoom has been purposely and artificially limited by a mechanical coupling to prevent the lens opening up to its widest aperture at the shorter focal lengths. There is nothing special about a fixed aperture zoom, it has just been contained not to fully utilize the light gathering potential of the front element when not used at the far tele end.

Secondly telephoto lens complexity is related to the physical aperture size and the diameter of the front element, the actual f-number is irrelevant.
Instead of thinking about correcting a 400mm lens at f/4.0 and a 200mm lens at f/2.0, you need to be thinking about correcting a lens with a 100mm aperture.

The fact that the 200mm /f2.0 lens behaves so well with TCs up to 400mm f/4.0 is just proof that that a 200-400mm f/2.0-f/4.0 is perfectly feasible with little added cost or complexity.

The new Nikon 80-400mm AF-S is another great example of allowing a zoom lens to utilize the aperture of the front element at wider focal lengths. It is more or less as sharp as the 200-400 but a stop slower at 400mm, less so at the wide end.


My eyes are on Sigma making a variable aperture 200-400mm f/2.8-f/4.0 or perhaps a 200-500mm /f3.5-f/5.6.

Both Nikon and Sigma have released F/2.8-f/4.0 variable aperture zooms at shorter focal length requiring retro-focus designs. A variable aperture telephoto is much simpler than that!
Click to expand...

If it was as simple and added no cost or weight then why hasn't it been done?
 
Well, not exactly new gear but I've picked my first DSLR, a used Canon 600D with the EF 28-90mm f4-5.6 II kit lens. Only had a brief play with it so far as it doesn't have a manual so lots of trial and error fun in the next few days. The menu seems pretty straightforward though so not too concerned.

Naturally the Canon 50mm f1.8 prime is already on order :p
 
Above&Beyond said:
If it was as simple and added no cost or weight then why hasn't it been done?
Click to expand...

Largely because of marketing and unfounded negative preconceptions about variable aperture zooms.

The thing is it is done all the time, Canon 100-400L, 70-300L, Nikon 80-400 AF-S nano etc. As is typically the case, the lens at shorter focal lengths and wider apertures are sharp than the lens at the tele end wide open - a result from the fact that despite having a wider aperture at the shorter end the lens is effectively stopped down and a front lens element designed for a larger focal length will always perform better at a shorter focal length
 
Tbh I'm not sure how many people out there wouldn't buy a good sharp lens just because it had a variable aperture. If I had a choice between a fixed F4 lens or a F2.8-F4 lens of equal IQ and price then I'd obviously choose the variable aperture lens. I get the impressive there must be more to it than just Canon thinking lens snobs out there wouldn't buy them?

Anyway, a few more weeks after buying my 200-400mm and there's still no buyers remorse :D I had a good run with it this weekend at a localish Medieval Festival. I'm not sure this is what Canon had in mind when they made this lens but I had fun with it :)

Full albums:

Jousting - https://www.flickr.com/photos/phal44/sets/72157646842676261/
Falconry - https://www.flickr.com/photos/phal44/sets/72157646830110382/


and a couple of IQ taster shots :D

Sunday Jousting round 1 - (28) by Phal44, on Flickr


Eyes On Target by Phal44, on Flickr
 
You are getting great results there!
The biggest issue I have with my 300mm + 1.4xTC combo is continuous AF and tracking is quite poor so BiF is very frustrating.

Really hoping Sigma start releasing super telephoto again. There were rumours last year but all gone quite. Definitely space for a Sigma 400mm f/4.0, a re-release of their 500mm f/4.5, and something longer - 600mm or f/5.6 for example. All a bit slower than the CaNikon but will allow a much cheaper and lighter lens that is still a world apart from the consumer stuff.
 
D.P. said:
You are getting great results there!
The biggest issue I have with my 300mm + 1.4xTC combo is continuous AF and tracking is quite poor so BiF is very frustrating.

Really hoping Sigma start releasing super telephoto again. There were rumours last year but all gone quite. Definitely space for a Sigma 400mm f/4.0, a re-release of their 500mm f/4.5, and something longer - 600mm or f/5.6 for example. All a bit slower than the CaNikon but will allow a much cheaper and lighter lens that is still a world apart from the consumer stuff.
Click to expand...

This was another reason for my failed attempt at 'making do' with a Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 and some converters. The AF was so meh that I would have no chance to gets birds in flight unless they flew perpendicular to me in a straight line :/

I contemplated the 500mm F4.5 but it's a weird lens since you can't stick a converter on it and keep AF on most bodies.

I saw some vague rumors of some kind of new Sigma Telephoto zoom at Photokina and they mentioned 300-600mm which I would have been interested in but since it was just a rumour and I'm impatient, I didn't wait lol.
 
Janesy, I was thinking about swapping my 7D out for the 5Dc, you have a 7D too correct?

Obviously I can get a 5Dc for about £200 cheaper, but how does the lack of live view etc effect you?

Also it looks like you might have a focus issue with your lens (unless it's the compression which has altered the focus)
 
Cleisthenes said:
Janesy, I was thinking about swapping my 7D out for the 5Dc, you have a 7D too correct?

Obviously I can get a 5Dc for about £200 cheaper, but how does the lack of live view etc effect you?

Also it looks like you might have a focus issue with your lens (unless it's the compression which has altered the focus)
Click to expand...

I have a 70D but that's staying, this is something just to mess about with. Personally I wouldn't miss live view though.

Focus is okay, those were quick snapshots wide open at f1.4.

Screenshot%202014-08-28%2020.46.15.png
Screenshot%202014-08-28%2020.46.33.png
Screenshot%202014-08-28%2020.46.50.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom