Best way to blow $2000?

[msbc]

Ok, here's the deal - I'm visiting USA in 3 weeks, from Australia, and need to update my lens collection. I have US$2000 to spend (current equipment listed in sig). I've narrowed my shopping list to 2 options:
1. 70-200 2.8L + 135 2L
2. 70-200 4L + 135 2L + TC1.4x + some Lee filters

Both options cost roughly the same $2000 so cost is not the issue in deciding among them.

Option 1 gives me speed while option 2 gives me increased focal range and versatility with the TC.

What I'm not sure of is would I use the 135 2L if I have the 70-200 2.8L - the speed diff is small. Would it just sit in my bag?

Is there a better Option 3 that I haven't considered?

I shoot mostly landscapes, cityscapes, portraits but don't want to be 'limited' by my lens collection (shoot indoors, wildlife etc if oppertunity arises). I'd like to maximise my options but quality of results is top priority.

I'd REALLY appreciate some constructive feedback.

Mark

[Aylwin]

How about:

3. 70-200 2.8L IS

I'm sure the IS will more than make up for the extra stop that the 135 2L has. I have no idea about the price though.

[DocFrankenstein]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=234444&is=GREY

1600 USD

Seems like a good purchase for his budget

[c0ntr0lz]

that's what i was going to suggest
or get that thing rocky got the Bigma/Sigma 50-500mm

[msbc]

Well, I considered the 2.8L IS but only having one lens, and a heavy one at that, seems a bit restrictive. I couldn't see myself using this as a walkabout lens. Which is why I included the 135 2L. I can go wondering with this on the 10D and the TC1.4x in my pocket. Easy to carry, excellent quality, fast speed.

[defordphoto]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=234444&is=GREY

1600 USD

Seems like a good purchase for his budget

Why go grey market? There's a rebate on the USA version and it's the same price as the grey: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=234444&is=USA

[defordphoto]

Well, I considered the 2.8L IS but only having one lens, and a heavy one at that, seems a bit restrictive. I couldn't see myself using this as a walkabout lens. Which is why I included the 135 2L. I can go wondering with this on the 10D and the TC1.4x in my pocket. Easy to carry, excellent quality, fast speed.

Then get this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=149629&is=USA

[Aylwin]

I think the 28-135 IS and 70-20 2.8L IS make a great pair. Plus, it's seems to fit nicely within the budget.

[WestFalcon]

Get the 70-200 2.8 and a 17-40 L for landscapes. Both are great lenses with superb resale value if you do not like either.

[msbc]

Get the 70-200 2.8 and a 17-40 L for landscapes. Both are great lenses with superb resale value if you do not like either.

I already have the 17-40 - I think I have the WA and Standard focal lengths covered.

[msbc]

I think the 28-135 IS and 70-20 2.8L IS make a great pair. Plus, it's seems to fit nicely within the budget.

Actually, I just eBay'ed my 28-135 - wasn't totally happy with the picture quality it produced, and I found it a bit on the slow side.

[Belmondo]

You want portability? Try this combination for just under $2K. They're both small, easy to carry, and the DO lesn, while not 'L' quality, is still extremely good. I suspect this will be my travel kit when the 'big lenses' have to stay home.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=319783&is=USA

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=279582&is=USA

[msbc]

You want portability? Try this combination for just under $2K. They're both small, easy to carry, and the DO lesn, while not 'L' quality, is still extremely good. I suspect this will be my travel kit when the 'big lenses' have to stay home.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=319783&is=USA

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=279582&is=USA

I've read some mediocre reviews of the 70-300 DO and, as my sig says, I already own the 17-40 4L.

[cc10d]

msbc said:
I've read some mediocre reviews of the 70-300 DO and, as my sig says, I already own the 17-40 4L.

:arrow: I think that there are some camera - lens combinations that may produce sllightly off wide open focus.

The experiance that my wife has had with the 70-300 DO + DRebel has been very favorable and the results have been good. Very close to my 100-400 L +10D. For whatever that is worth, we LIKE the lens.

Chuck

[cc10d]

Much easier walk around lense than most other high end lens.

[Belmondo]

I've read some mediocre reviews of the 70-300 DO.

I'll let you know what I think FWIW. Mine's supposed to be delivered today.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Wow,. a whole thread of responses trying talk you out of one of the best lenses Canon has ever made :?


I'd keep the 135mm f/2 on my list... then I might just stick with the 70-200 f/4 thinking that for the most part the fast stuff could be covered with the prime.

But.. this brings up a question that you should really ask yourself.

Where do you want to be in your collection? Do you fancy being a prime shooter? Will you likely get an 85mm f/1.8 some day?

If not.. then maybe the f/2.8 option makes sense to give you speed over more of a range.


My feeling is that my primes may very well be large and heavy. I'd like my zooms to be ligher and more portable. The 70-200mm f/2.8 is not lightweight.

Anyway.. my 2p

[msbc]

I've decided to go with option 2. The quality of images and speed of the 135 2L make it a must have, IMHO. I've discounted the 2.8L as I don't believe it offers anything over the 4L - the extra weight, without IS, removes the one stop advantage.

I also considered just the 2.8L IS. I decided against this purely on the weight/ portability issue. I do want to own one of these in the next 12-18 months but I reckon the 4L will keep it's resale value so I won't loose in the long run.

Thanks everyone for your feedback.

Mark

[drisley]

I love primes! The 85mm F1.8 is my fav lens (with the 70-200F4L a close second).
However, I find them a little restrictive. For example, the last bodybuilding show I shot, I got amazing results when I wanted to focus on one subject. But, when I needed a group photo, I just couldnt do it.
And if I wanted to switch from my 85mm to 50mm, I would have to do so atleast 30 times each way that nite.
So, I am now looking at the 70-200 F2.8L IS. I definately wanted the 135mm F2L as it is an amazing lens. But in situations where you are stationary, it's just too limiting. That is just my situation. Yours may be completely different.
I tihnk both options, 1 & 2, are winners.

[timmyquest]

Well, I considered the 2.8L IS but only having one lens, and a heavy one at that, seems a bit restrictive. I couldn't see myself using this as a walkabout lens. Which is why I included the 135 2L. I can go wondering with this on the 10D and the TC1.4x in my pocket. Easy to carry, excellent quality, fast speed.

How is having a nicer zoom lens more restrictive then having a great zoom lens and a nice prime that fits within that zoom's range more restrictive?