Topic: Mr. mccabe what camera did you use to get this shot of Warren Haynes from NYE?

[Frank in JC]

After a bunch of research, I'm thinking of passing on the canon 70-200 2.8L and getting the Sigma 70-200 2.8 ex DG APO HSM (769.00 for the MKII version) or the Tamron SP AF 70-200 2.8 DI LD Macro (699.00 but not out yet)

with the huge savings I can pick up the 1.4x ring and another lens or a 2nd body.

JAson

My advice would be to pass on any 200mm lens that doesn't have image stabilization, especially when used on a cropped-sensor body (which effectively magnifies camera shake).  Unless you can get it for a song or will be using it on a tripod, save your money for the big boy.  I know the Canon IS version is twice the cost, but you'll know where the money went when you use it. 

[bluntforcetrauma]

After a bunch of research, I'm thinking of passing on the canon 70-200 2.8L and getting the Sigma 70-200 2.8 ex DG APO HSM (769.00 for the MKII version) or the Tamron SP AF 70-200 2.8 DI LD Macro (699.00 but not out yet)

with the huge savings I can pick up the 1.4x ring and another lens or a 2nd body.

JAson

My advice would be to pass on any 200mm lens that doesn't have image stabilization, especially when used on a cropped-sensor body (which effectively magnifies camera shake).  Unless you can get it for a song or will be using it on a tripod, save your money for the big boy.  I know the Canon IS version is twice the cost, but you'll know where the money went when you use it. 

i think so too, its in the canon IS lenses

[stirinthesauce]

I disagree, but, I"m in the minority I know.  The non IS is a sharper lens.  To avoid camera shake, just make sure your shutter speeds are above your length (200mm, shoot at over 1/320 on a 1.6x crop lens).  I personally have zero problems at 1/150 for 200mm and 1/70 for 70mm.  With a monopod I can get even lower.  Problem for me is, under 1/60th or 1/70th of a second, I can't stop movement on stage, so I'm not going lower anyways.  Just takes a steady hand.  Get against a wall, a pole, use your strap, whatever it takes to have a steady hand.  A monopod works fantastic.

Yes, the IS would be nice, but, I haven't been in a situation that I coulnd't overcome and get tack sharp images from my non IS 70-200L

Here are a few from a back in January that are handy, all shot with this lens, handheld, without a monopod.


edited to add:  Ya'll notice that weird pixalation in the background on shot #2?  Photoshop cs3 sure didn't downsize very gracefully in that pic   

all of these were in extremely low light without a monopod with this lens (except the first one, shot with a 24-70) http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,99718.0.html

[phanophish]

I disagree, but, I"m in the minority I know.  The non IS is a sharper lens.  To avoid camera shake, just make sure your shutter speeds are above your length (200mm, shoot at over 1/320 on a 1.6x crop lens).  I personally have zero problems at 1/150 for 200mm and 1/70 for 70mm.  With a monopod I can get even lower.  Problem for me is, under 1/60th or 1/70th of a second, I can't stop movement on stage, so I'm not going lower anyways.  Just takes a steady hand.  Get against a wall, a pole, use your strap, whatever it takes to have a steady hand.  A monopod works fantastic.

Yes, the IS would be nice, but, I haven't been in a situation that I coulnd't overcome and get tack sharp images from my non IS 70-200L

FWIW I agree with this for concert shooting.  The IS/VR is a big plus but won't help with subject movement.  I'll also add that I used to own the Sigma 70-200/2.8 and now have the Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR (Nikon's version of IS).  It's a better lens than the Sigma but I did get some great images with the good 'ol Sigma.  You can find them used in the $600-700 range.  But the overall better image quality made the upgrade to the OEM glass attractive to me.  I sold my Sigma for darn near what I bought it for after about a year so remember you can always upgrade for a fairly small $$ penalty.  Think of it as a long term equipment rental.

[bluntforcetrauma]

I disagree, but, I"m in the minority I know.  The non IS is a sharper lens.  To avoid camera shake, just make sure your shutter speeds are above your length (200mm, shoot at over 1/320 on a 1.6x crop lens).  I personally have zero problems at 1/150 for 200mm and 1/70 for 70mm.  With a monopod I can get even lower.  Problem for me is, under 1/60th or 1/70th of a second, I can't stop movement on stage, so I'm not going lower anyways.  Just takes a steady hand.  Get against a wall, a pole, use your strap, whatever it takes to have a steady hand.  A monopod works fantastic.

Yes, the IS would be nice, but, I haven't been in a situation that I coulnd't overcome and get tack sharp images from my non IS 70-200L

Here are a few from a back in January that are handy, all shot with this lens, handheld, without a monopod.


edited to add:  Ya'll notice that weird pixalation in the background on shot #2?  Photoshop cs3 sure didn't downsize very gracefully in that pic   

all of these were in extremely low light without a monopod with this lens (except the first one, shot with a 24-70) http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,99718.0.html

what camera body do you use?

and what is a cropped sensor body?  and is the xti cropped sensor body?

thanks a zillion

[stirinthesauce]

I shoot a canon 20d

The canons use a crop sized sensor of 1.6x for xxx and xx series glass.  The 5d is a full size sensor.  Nikon xx and not sure of the xxx bodies are I believe a 1.4x crop.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a crop size in relation to the old camera style focal lengths in relation to a standard 35mm?  At least that is how I've read it.  Full frame sensor gives you, with a 24, 25, 50, 70mm glass that focal length.  If I'm shooting on a 1.6x crop body, then a 24mm lens will actually give me 38.4mm of reach.  Wildlife and sports photog's like the added length of a crop body because it gives them more reach.  Glass gets way pricey on the longer focal lengths, every little bit of added length helps.

Of course, a nice big full frame sensor is nice.   

[Frank in JC]

I disagree, but, I"m in the minority I know.  The non IS is a sharper lens.  To avoid camera shake, just make sure your shutter speeds are above your length (200mm, shoot at over 1/320 on a 1.6x crop lens).  I personally have zero problems at 1/150 for 200mm and 1/70 for 70mm.  With a monopod I can get even lower.  Problem for me is, under 1/60th or 1/70th of a second, I can't stop movement on stage, so I'm not going lower anyways.  Just takes a steady hand.  Get against a wall, a pole, use your strap, whatever it takes to have a steady hand.  A monopod works fantastic.

Yes, the IS would be nice, but, I haven't been in a situation that I coulnd't overcome and get tack sharp images from my non IS 70-200L

FWIW I agree with this for concert shooting.  The IS/VR is a big plus but won't help with subject movement.  I'll also add that I used to own the Sigma 70-200/2.8 and now have the Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR (Nikon's version of IS).  It's a better lens than the Sigma but I did get some great images with the good 'ol Sigma.  You can find them used in the $600-700 range.  But the overall better image quality made the upgrade to the OEM glass attractive to me.  I sold my Sigma for darn near what I bought it for after about a year so remember you can always upgrade for a fairly small $$ penalty.  Think of it as a long term equipment rental.

True, concert photography generally requires high enough shutter speeds that are already somewhat safe from camera shake.  But any person with more than a casual interest in photography should be very well served by IS/VR for the rest of their work.  I've been in plenty of situations where I would have had to bump the ISO to get the shot if I didn't have VR at the long end.  I had my doubts before I owned one, but the feature is no gimmick.

Nikon didn't think they needed it either