Aside from the price, which is often in the thousands and thousands of dollars, can you really tell the difference between an f/2.8 lens and an f/4 lens?
In my many years of photography, I think the most repetitive dilemma I have always faced has been the choice between a lens with a wide aperture of f/2.8 rather than a lens with a wide aperture of f/2.8. maximum degree f / 4 . For context, I’m not a portrait photographer and mostly shoot landscapes in good light, so I’ve never really considered the need for an f/2.8 aperture in those situations. your particular case, especially since they are often several thousand dollars more expensive and add a significant amount of weight. to the master setting. That being the case, I’ve never considered the need for a lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8, but I’ve always been curious if they’re much better.
And that brings us to this amazing video brought to you by Nigel Danson. In this video, he compares the two 24-70mm . lens: one with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 and one that stops down to f/4. The first significant difference is the price, it’s no secret. But thousands of dollars difference? That’s a big price to pay, so you want to be sure of the benefits. The other big difference is immediately weight: the f/2.8 weighs in at 800 g while the f/4 lens is noticeably lighter at 500 g. But what about the image quality and the end result? I don’t want to spoil it for you, so watch the video and let me know what you think in the comments section below.
