A&P Is it just me, or is the 70-200 2.8 easier to manually focus?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by BadRotation, Oct 8, 2006.

  1. BadRotation

    BadRotation New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    11,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OT Train Crew #1225
    seems like the 70-200 2.8L IS is extremely easy to manually focus, even on the 20d. All my other lenses I find pretty much impossible to focus manually due to the small viewfinder.

    At first I thought it was because of the larger arperture, but my 50 1.8 is pretty much impossible to manually focus as well.

    Might be because of the better optics, but damn it seems easy.

    Had to manually focus alot of shots last night at a wedding I was shooting (the crzy lights at the reception were really screwing with AF).
     
  2. canonshooter

    canonshooter New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    0
    it is because of the larger aperture, and the fact that it has a real manual focus ring unlike the 50 1.8
     
  3. saebryan

    saebryan New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,339
    Likes Received:
    0
    What do you think of the 2.8 is the IS really necessary?
     
  4. BadRotation

    BadRotation New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    11,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OT Train Crew #1225

    It is a great lens, one of my most used.. Just waiting for my 300 2.8, an then all I will need is a wide angle L lens and my collection will be complete.

    As for the IS, it really depends on what you shoot. It comes in handy for low light shots of still objects if you are hand holding the camera. Generally it doesn't work the best in low light with people moving around, but I will say it saved my ass last night at the reception after the wedding I shot.
     
  5. no it's just that the 70-200 autofocus blows balzz in low light conditions, that's my only gripe about this lens.
     

Share This Page