| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
huhging
Joined: 24 Jan 2008 Posts: 41 Location: New York
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huhging
Joined: 24 Jan 2008 Posts: 41 Location: New York
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ManWearPants
Joined: 18 Feb 2010 Posts: 51
|
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am on the fence about these 2 lenses. The 300 is significantly larger and heavier than the 200. Can someone who has experience with both lens advice on the following:
1) which has better bokeh
2) At what distance from subject does one has to be , in order to get reasonable OoF blur?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sander
Joined: 08 Oct 2010 Posts: 18
|
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
I used to have a 70-300 (non-lemon):
- sharp from 70 to 200
- not so sharp from 200-300 unless stopped down considerably
- OK bokeh for a zoom lens
I recently traded my 70-300 for a 70-200 because of the weigth difference and not using the 200-300 range:
- sharper from 70 to 200
- noisier af compared to 70-300
- Nice bokeh for a zoom lens
So imo the 70-200 has better bokeh and you can get much closer yielding better bokeh for portraits for example. Not sure about the Oof distance..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|