Tale of the Two Lenses

When I first purchased my Canon 450D (Digital Rebel XSi) back in the day (alright so I haven’t had it for years…), I bought it as a kit from one of those Big Box Retailers. The kit included the camera body itself (of course), the EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS lens and the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III lens.

When I first started taking photos with the 75-300mm lens I was happy that I could reach further than any of the point and shoot cameras I have and had used previously. I love to get closer to things I normally could not get close to, such as birds or other little critters. I loved getting up and close without having to get physically close to the subject as this helps not spook what you’re trying to shoot.

I remember taking my new setup it with me to Pitt Polder (Grant Narrows Regional Park) in Pitt Meadows in hopes of capturing some of the resident Osprey that nest there each year. Though on a side note, even at 300mm I still couldn’t get as close as I would have liked to, but I was excited to see the results at home. I went pretty shutter crazy actually.

The above photo was taken with my Canon XSi and the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III lens. Notice that it’s not in focus either!

I knew I would have to do some cropping on the photos to get even closer. Even at 12 megapixels, you have a bit of room to crop without loosing too much detail. When I loaded up the photos I was disappointed with the Image Quality (or IQ) of the photos that were captured with the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6. You could see the purple fringing (Chromatic Aberration) around the Osprey and other objects within the photo. From that point, I wanted to upgrade my lens for something of higher quality, something that wouldn’t produce the icky purple fringing or halo.

Yup, that’s when I purchased the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens. Probably the most popular lens, in terms of focal length and quality for most photographers. Too bad it is also one of the more expensive lenses for a hobbyist to acquire too (retails for roughly $2000). Yes, I know there are other lenses that are more expensive, but for this one and it’s focal length it’s pretty high up there.

So where am I going with this post? Well, I thought I would try and show the image difference between the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III and the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens. Sure, one costs 10 times the other one, but this is for more fun and I definitely don’t regret paying the price for it either. I have certainly gotten my money’s worth!

Today I went back to Pitt Polder (Grant Narrows Regional Park) in Pitt Meadows, in hopes of capturing some nesting Osprey. Though, there weren’t any. There is only 1 nest and it was occupied by a couple herons. So here is what I took a photo of:

Yup, a typical American Robin. They were somewhat abundant and easily spooked but I tried to get this one to stay in the tree long enough to do my little experiment.

The above photo was taken with my Canon 7D (18MP) and the EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III lens at 300mm. I tried to keep the camera settings the same between lens too, which were: 1/1000th, f8.0, ISO1600, AI Servo.

Not horrible when you look at the photo without zooming into it eh? I did no post processing other than re-sized to 800 pixels wide to fit here on my site. It is also a JPG at 72dpi and sitting at Flickr so there tends to be some additional quality loss too.

Now if were to you zoom up (roughly 100% crop), as the above photo represents, you will notice the purple fringing/halo (Chromatic Aberration) around the robin as well as the branches. So any cropping of this particular photo, the IQ drops and the purple fringing is something that drives me insane. Perhaps I am too picky?

Then the little bugger took off to a tree near by and I tried to set up a similar shot but with my EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens.

Granted, I might not be the exact same distance away from the robin this time (though I am pretty close) but I am also shooting at the maximum focal length of 200mm for this shot as opposed to 300mm with the other lens. Again, I did not do any post-processing with this photo either, expect for the re-size and convert to JPG.

Let’s zoom up! Even though the previous shot was taken at ISO 1600, this one was taken at ISO1250 (yes, I was shooting on auto ISO). Do you see any purple fringing (Chromatic Aberration) with this photo? I don’t. Too bad I couldn’t get the little bugger to turn his head and face me so I would have a similar shot, but the outline of the bird and his position is roughly the same. The image seems a sharper too, though I am sure I didn’t really miss focus with the other shot, just the optics (glass) are not as quality as it is in this particular lens.

Anyway, from the two original sized photos they look pretty similar. It’s only when you zoom (or crop) into them you start to notice some Image Quality (IQ) differences.

There are other reasons why one lens if 10 times the value of the other lens but for me a BIG issue was the Chromatic Aberration and it stopped me from being able to crop in more. Also while playing with both lenses I noticed that the Auto-Focus was a lot quicker on the more expensive lens which helps you score that in-focus shot when panning to follow the subject. Something to think about if you’re looking to get into Sports Photography where quick focusing can make or break a photo!

So does this help explain a bit better why I went with a more expensive lens? I find it interesting anyway, I hope someone out there might find the comparison interesting too. Yes, it’s not a direct comparison of say a Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS lens against a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS lens, but I hope it shows how a more expensive lens might help bring out more in your photos too. I’m also not saying that you can’t produce great work with not spending top dollar on your gear, but it doesn’t hurt it either.

Now I think I have decided on what lens to get next, definitely something with more reach! The EF 100-400mm IS is a good reach and won’t break the bank (too much).