Author Topic: Canon lens help/advice (Read 7788 times)

stirinthesauce · « **on:** July 12, 2007, 11:00:23 AM »

Need some advice/help from some of ya'll with experience shooting canon zoom lenses. I've got a sigma 70-300 which is alright, but quickly found it's limitations. So, I desperately want a 70-200L series lens. I'm looking at the 70-200L IS USM f4, 70-200L USM f2.8, and the 70-200L IS USM f2.8.

Ideally, I want the 70-200L IS USM f2.8 (my dream telephoto zoom lens) but buying that lens will pretty much wipe me out financially. That leaves me with the option of the 70-200L IS USM f4 (could get now) or the 70-200L USM f2.8 (could also get now). So, any recommendations. I would like to use these as crossover lenses, both daytime and concert (low light) photography. I'm thinking the IS USM f4 won't be fast enough but I'm not sure, since I can hand hold lower shutter speeds being IS. The L USM 2.8 would be great but is it going to be a significant drop in image quality? Should I save my pennies and buy my dream lens?

I already have a 24-70 f2.8 that I'm very happy with and a 50 1.8 so I really just need to step up the quality of my tele zoom.

Help me decide

eric.B · « **Reply #1 on:** July 12, 2007, 11:08:41 AM »

Quote from: stirinthesauce on July 12, 2007, 11:00:23 AM

Need some advice/help from some of ya'll with experience shooting canon zoom lenses. I've got a sigma 70-300 which is alright, but quickly found it's limitations. So, I desperately want a 70-200L series lens. I'm looking at the 70-200L IS USM f4, 70-200L USM f2.8, and the 70-200L IS USM f2.8.

Ideally, I want the 70-200L IS USM f2.8 (my dream telephoto zoom lens) but buying that lens will pretty much wipe me out financially. That leaves me with the option of the 70-200L IS USM f4 (could get now) or the 70-200L USM f2.8 (could also get now). So, any recommendations. I would like to use these as crossover lenses, both daytime and concert (low light) photography. I'm thinking the IS USM f4 won't be fast enough but I'm not sure, since I can hand hold lower shutter speeds being IS. The L USM 2.8 would be great but is it going to be a significant drop in image quality? Should I save my pennies and buy my dream lens?

I already have a 24-70 f2.8 that I'm very happy with and a 50 1.8 so I really just need to step up the quality of my tele zoom.

Help me decide

save your cake for the dream lens..

spreetaper · « **Reply #2 on:** July 12, 2007, 11:18:13 AM »

or 2nd option go for the 70-200 non IS f2.8 and learn to hold your camera still and or get a monopod!

ive had the Non IS version for 4 months now and not once have I wished I went for the IS lense

really though you can't go wrong either way with the f2.8 IS or non IS..
both are stellar lenses and the resale value is great too

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #3 on:** July 12, 2007, 11:23:29 AM »

Quote from: spreetaper on July 12, 2007, 11:18:13 AM

or 2nd option go for the 70-200 non IS f2.8 and learn to hold your camera still and or get a monopod!
ive had the Non IS version for 4 months now and not once have I wished I went for the IS lense

really though you can't go wrong either way with the f2.8 IS or non IS..
both are stellar lenses and the resale value is great too

That's what I'm leaning towards. Canon lenses hold their value and I can always trade up. The leftover cash will be plenty helpful as I need a good flash soon, prefererbly one of the speedlites like the 580. I have a tripod, but think a monopod would be great for indoor concert stuff.

spreetaper · « **Reply #4 on:** July 12, 2007, 12:00:29 PM »

well for indoor concerts its not the greatest unless ur close up or no more than 30-40 feet from stage imo
i prefer the 85mm f1.8 for indoor stuff a little further away
which you could also get if you dont have already and its still less than the total of the IS lense

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #5 on:** July 12, 2007, 01:43:29 PM »

Quote from: spreetaper on July 12, 2007, 12:00:29 PM

well for indoor concerts its not the greatest unless ur close up or no more than 30-40 feet from stage imo
i prefer the 85mm f1.8 for indoor stuff a little further away
which you could also get if you dont have already and its still less than the total of the IS lense

I've thought about the 85 f1.8, and that probably is down the line, however I do more daytime shooting than concert shooting, but do want a crossover lens. Typically, the concert shooting would be fairly close.

However, if your wanting to make some more suggestion, I'm also looking for something in the 10-22mm range or maybe a prime 20mm wide angle for landscapes. I'll probably go non-canon on this simply for the cost factor. Wanting to keep that around the $300 mark, give or take some, especially if going the way of the prime. My 24-70 is nice for landscapes, but want something a tad wider.

bhtoque · « **Reply #6 on:** July 12, 2007, 08:00:29 PM »

Not sure if it will help, but the pics I shot at moe. recently are with my 75-300 4-5.6 IS USM

The close ups are from up front, but lots of them are from the section.

There's also tons of daylight shots with it on my flickr page.

Check it out. I think the IS L is not worth the huge premium.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8466411@N02/

JAson

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #7 on:** July 12, 2007, 08:35:48 PM »

Well, if anyone is interested, I'm selling my sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 apo dg. BHphoto has it listed for 219. I'll sell for $170 shipped to your door. Lens is 2 months old. Any takers? A sample pic of my 1yr old cousing is a page or so back taken with this lens on a 20d. Great day time lens. I've just got the fever

dmccabe · « **Reply #8 on:** July 13, 2007, 12:43:25 PM »

Every photographer regrets buying the cheaper lens. You will always end up selling it to get the better lens, at a loss.
I always wait until I can afford the "L" lens.

The Canon 70-200 L IS is my "go-to" lens for concerts! The only thing better would be the f1.8 300mm, which is twice the price and also leaves you stuck at shotting from rather far away -- 300mm up close would give you nose hair shots.

Get the fastest lens you can afford... the f1.8 85mm is a great lens... but it is a prime lens "stuck" at one length... hard to vary framing with a prime lens... I like the range of the 70-200 better. The f1.8 85mm is also more money! That lens is the best lens for close portrait shots.

Also, if you know you are going to be close to the stage.. a "cheap" f1.8 50mm prime is a great lens. Super fast lens... plenty of frame area up close... sharp... lens goes for under $200! The f1.4 is even better... for under $400.

speed... speed... speed... low light... low light..... artists are moving about on stage. I see so many people where all their shots are blurry because of too slow shutter speed. my 2 cents.

This shot is from up in the balcony at the Beacon:
spec: 1/125 sec 800 ISO f4 at 200mm with the Canon 70-200 f.8 IS. Anything I shot under 1/125 would be slightly blurry. And that's with IS... so without the IS you would need to shoot at least at 1/250.

So any lens slower than a f2.8 and you are right on the edge on not get ANY good shots... a f4 lens is too slow unless there is "a lot" of light on stage from the balcony... don't forget your depth of field even at f4 on a f2.8 lens is only about 3-5 feet!

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #9 on:** July 13, 2007, 12:53:56 PM »

I don't regret the buying the lens I'm selling. It served me well for what I wanted it for, daylight shooting on a budget. I've gotten some great results. However, I am also a hardened gear slut

and I will always upgrade. Photo gear is just a new realm I've been diving into the last 6 months. I don't mind losing money on new gear either, I consider it rental fee.

Decided on the 70-200L f2.8. I'll probably by new. IS version will of course be my next upgrade bug

Very happy with my sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG. I'll be keeping that for awhile. Got a fixed 50 f 1.8 for the really lowlight upclose stuff so I'm set there.

Great pic of Warren by the way

dmccabe · « **Reply #10 on:** July 13, 2007, 01:03:54 PM »

I am putting together an "online Book"... it's taking me forever... I shot 15,000 shots at the Beacon run

I went to every night of the run... got pictures of ALL the guest players... shot in bursts of 5... so going through in Adobe Lightroom the pick the best shots... I used 2 8gb compact flash cards each show and never game even close to running out of compact flash space, even shooting at max raw resolution... about 1,000 shots per show.

About 500 are keepers!

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #11 on:** July 13, 2007, 01:11:06 PM »

Quote from: dmccabe on July 13, 2007, 01:03:54 PM

I am putting together an "online Book"... it's taking me forever... I shot 15,000 shots at the Beacon run
I went to every night of the run... got pictures of ALL the guest players... shot in bursts of 5... so going through in Adobe Lightroom the pick the best shots... I used 2 8gb compact flash cards each show and never game even close to running out of compact flash space, even shooting at max raw resolution... about 1,000 shots per show.

About 500 are keepers!

taking forever is probably an understatement. I don't envy you at all. uhhhhhggggg, that 's some work you've got for yourself. Hell, I'm here complaining about a couple hundred from the 4th of my family reunion and another hundred of a friends child at Tennis practice.

dmccabe · « **Reply #12 on:** July 13, 2007, 01:12:36 PM »

I might suggest renting a lens to try it out before you buy. There are plenty of places now where you can rent a "$2000+" lens for like $100 a week! Check out www.ziplens.com. Really great way to try before you buy.

If you need a special lens for a one time event... no need to actually buy the lens... just rent it.

spreetaper · « **Reply #13 on:** July 13, 2007, 01:14:43 PM »

just keep in mind the 85mm f1.8 is primed for those people who are taping and want to stay near their gear and still do reasonably well in low light at smaller clubs
some of the best pictures ive taken from fob at small clubs is with that lense
it also helps to be really tall like i am but thats another story
its a bit too far for shots at a full arena or ampitheater show with you in the section but you can still do decently getting full stage shots.. then again most of the times at those bigger shows DSLR's are not allowed

lastly i disagree about the comment that one always regrets going for a cheaper lense
its been mentioned time and time again that the 50mm f1.8 is good for the money and i certainly dont regret buying that
now that I have much nicer lenses i still use that lense very often and have never once had a regret in buying it!
plus just as with taping gear its important to start out with less expensive gear so you learn to get the most out of what you have...

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #14 on:** July 13, 2007, 01:17:21 PM »

Quote from: dmccabe on July 13, 2007, 01:12:36 PM

I might suggest renting a lens to try it out before you buy. There are plenty of places now where you can rent a "$2000+" lens for like $100 a week! Check out www.ziplens.com. Really great way to try before you buy.

Problem is, I live in the middle of nowhere. Closest place to rent a lens is 90 miles away. When you live on top of a mountain on the cumberland plateu, most people's expertise at photography is the disposable kodak film jobbies at the drugstore. Nashville has a great store, Dury's, that I visit when I'm up there (about once every week or so, sometimes more), but that would be a lenghty rental time.

Now that online rental place looks interesting.

dmccabe · « **Reply #15 on:** July 13, 2007, 01:39:40 PM »

Quote from: stirinthesauce on July 13, 2007, 01:17:21 PM

Problem is, I live in the middle of nowhere.

Yeah with Ziplens.com it doesn't matter where you live... and you can reserve a lens months in advance.
I think they are great prices too.

rreidiii · « **Reply #16 on:** July 13, 2007, 02:52:52 PM »

Bought a 70-200Lf2.8 IS and will never look back. At 47yo my hands are just not what they use to be. If canon made a 24-70L 2.8 with IS Id trade my 24-70L 2.8 in a second.

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2007, 11:15:14 PM »

Well, either tomorrow night or Monday morning I'm pulling the trigger on a 70-200 f/2.8 L USM

I'm extrememly anxious. Can't wait to get and take it out in the field. A big motivator is that in a month, I'm going backpacking on the AT for about 4 or 5 days north of the smokies and really want to take a bunch of pics. Don't mind hauling the tripod and a couple lenses, I'm used to packing real light an extra 8-10lbs is nothing much. Extra batt is in route and I've got plenty of cards so hopefully I'll be good to go and able to get plenty of shots to work with when I get home.

MattD · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2007, 08:55:20 AM »

Quote from: stirinthesauce on July 14, 2007, 11:15:14 PM

Well, either tomorrow night or Monday morning I'm pulling the trigger on a 70-200 f/2.8 L USM I'm extrememly anxious. Can't wait to get and take it out in the field. A big motivator is that in a month, I'm going backpacking on the AT for about 4 or 5 days north of the smokies and really want to take a bunch of pics. Don't mind hauling the tripod and a couple lenses, I'm used to packing real light an extra 8-10lbs is nothing much. Extra batt is in route and I've got plenty of cards so hopefully I'll be good to go and able to get plenty of shots to work with when I get home.

Any reason not to go with the f/4IS version of that lens, especially if you're hiking? The 2.8 is a beast, though an awesome lens.

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2007, 10:48:11 AM »

Quote from: MattD on July 15, 2007, 08:55:20 AM

Quote from: stirinthesauce on July 14, 2007, 11:15:14 PM
Well, either tomorrow night or Monday morning I'm pulling the trigger on a 70-200 f/2.8 L USM I'm extrememly anxious. Can't wait to get and take it out in the field. A big motivator is that in a month, I'm going backpacking on the AT for about 4 or 5 days north of the smokies and really want to take a bunch of pics. Don't mind hauling the tripod and a couple lenses, I'm used to packing real light an extra 8-10lbs is nothing much. Extra batt is in route and I've got plenty of cards so hopefully I'll be good to go and able to get plenty of shots to work with when I get home.

Any reason not to go with the f/4IS version of that lens, especially if you're hiking? The 2.8 is a beast, though an awesome lens.

I need more flexibility, especially in lower light situations. IS is not a deal breaker for me, since I do alot of my shooting with a tripod and will have that with me. I have to admit, the f4 IS was very appealing (especially at the stellar price point), I just feel the f2.8 will serve me better in the longer run. Ideally I would get the IS f/2.8 but I can't swing another 400-500. Plus, from all the reviews I've read, the non IS version is a bit sharper. Of course, i may find I want the IS and upgrade later when I can afford to

BayTaynt3d · « **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2007, 01:17:41 PM »

I have rented the 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens about four times. It quite simply is the most amazing lens I've ever used. If you have the money to burn, it is worth every single penny. And if you're going to go this high end to begin with, you should definitely splurge the extra dough for the f2.8 IS. If you shoot low light it's REQUIRED, and if if you don't, you'll want that f2.8 anyway cause the shallow depth of field on that thing is absolutely beautiful. And at low light, I was able to get fairly sharp photos shooting 1/50 or 1/60 hand held and FULLY ZOOMED!!!!!! That's just crazy considering the general rule of thumb would be about 1/300th for my 30D at 200mm for hand held (1/200 * 1.6 crop). What's nice too is it has two IS modes, full IS and panning IS, which is another nice touch.

stirinthesauce · « **Reply #21 on:** July 15, 2007, 02:19:54 PM »

IF I had another 5 bills I would get the IS. However, I'm gonna go with the non IS L f2.8. The IS is a dream lens but just can't swing it. I'm stretching a bit as is. Not real concerned though, canon lenses hold a great resale value and when I'm able to jump up, it will be at a minimal loss on resale.

Most show photography I do, the lighting is really good. If not, I can always jump to my 1.8 50mm. or bump up my iso. At worst I will pick up a monopod which should be plenty of compensation (and cheaper than the jump to the 2.8L IS).

But again, most of my shooting is outdoors, of people and landscapes. The 2.8 is needed for the sake of people and the closeups of plant life, so as to really blur out the background.