70-200 dilemna...

[Mchu86]

So I'm in the market of buying a new lens for my Digital Rebel. As of now, I only have the kit lens and am in need of a longer zoom. I've narrowed it down to the EF 70-200's, but I've placed myself into a dilemna. I want to have the 70-200 f/2.8L but due to price, I may have to wait it out. So I'm thinking of getting the 70-200 f/4L. To my knowledge of browsing these forums, main difference between the two versions of the lens is mainly just weight. Optical quality and physical size, the two are very close. I would get the f/4L right now but I need some things cleared up. Has anyone used the f/4L at an indoor basketball game? If so, how did the lens perform? Was the shutter speeds fast enough to capture the action? These are the main questions keeping me from buying the f/4L, because I'm more than confident the f/2.8L will handle well in such conditions. Thanks everyone!

[Nightcrawler]

You can always consider the Sigma version.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=148317&is=USA

[Mogwyth]

For indoor use of this sort the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX is a great lens 95% the quaility of the the f/2.8 Canon for 50% of the price. it's weakest piont compared to the canon is wide open @ 70mm.

To be quite honest I could have brought the Canon but for my use it just did not offer enough improvement in quaility to warrant the extra cost Ie I normaly only print to 10x8 and at that size you can't realy differantiate between the two nor do I crop much. And with what I saved I brought a TC to go with the Sigma and the rest is giong towards a decent wide zoom.

[Adam Hicks]

Many reviews put the f4 sharper than the 2.8, and weight difference is significant. Of course you'll need more light, and there will be some instances where you'd like to be below f4, but I would think that if most of your shots are taken in sunlight or sufficient light, you'll be just as happy or happier with the f4 L 95% of the time. It's the biggest bargain in Canon's lens line-up (except maybe for the 50mm 1.8 and the 100mm 2.8 Macro which is just ridiculously sharp... better than most of the L's)

Get that F4! They hold their value so well that you can sell it at a $40 loss in a year and upgrade if you need to!

Adam

[pcasciola]

The differences between the 70-200mm f/4L and f/2.8L are way more than just weight. The f/2.8 has double the light gathering ability, and therefore double the shutter speed in the same lighting as the f/4. The f/2.8 is also sharper than the f/4 if both are shot at f/4. f/2.8 or faster (using primes) is where you want to be for indoor basketball. I've yet to see a lens slower than f/2.8 being used at a basketball game.

The sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is an option, but I've seen a lot of people reporting it is soft wide open, so that kind of makes it useless for what you are looking to use it for.

I'd say either wait it out and get the 70-200 f/2.8L, or get an 85mm f/1.8 for around $300 to hold you over. This is what I am doing until I have enough to get the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, hopefully before next baseball season.

[DaveG]

So I'm in the market of buying a new lens for my Digital Rebel. As of now, I only have the kit lens and am in need of a longer zoom. I've narrowed it down to the EF 70-200's, but I've placed myself into a dilemna. I want to have the 70-200 f/2.8L but due to price, I may have to wait it out. So I'm thinking of getting the 70-200 f/4L. To my knowledge of browsing these forums, main difference between the two versions of the lens is mainly just weight. Optical quality and physical size, the two are very close. I would get the f/4L right now but I need some things cleared up. Has anyone used the f/4L at an indoor basketball game? If so, how did the lens perform? Was the shutter speeds fast enough to capture the action? These are the main questions keeping me from buying the f/4L, because I'm more than confident the f/2.8L will handle well in such conditions. Thanks everyone!


Depending on the gym (obviously) you will probably run into problems, not only with f4 but with f2.8. Although it's difficult to say with certainty what the expsoure is going to be I've found that virtually every highschool gym I've ever shot in is 1/500 @ f2 with ISO1600.

You can't go higher than ISO1600 with your D Rebel so a more "film" speed is not possible.

So what lenses could you choose? No zooms that's for sure. But here's three prime lenses to think about: The 50 mm f1.4, the 85 f1.8 and the 100mm f2. The 50 will be a great lens to shoot with if you are allowed to sit on the baseline. It'll be like an 80mm lens on a full frame camera and it's the focal length that I've always liked for basketball. I'd try to sit on the baseline out by a corner. I could follow the guards moving the ball and still be able to turn and get the dirt in the key and above the rim.

For years I worked with an 85mm f1.8 (full frame) so with my 50 f1.4 I pick up either a stop in shutterspeed or I can lower my ISO by a stop. There's a 50 f1.8 that's really cheap but the newer one has a plastic lens mount, and I really question its build quality.

The 85mm focal length is a great lens for full frame but too long for much from the baseline on a D Rebel and the 100 is even longer. I think that I'd prefer the 100 over the 85 since it has a bit more reach. I've always despised the 135mm (which the 85 effectively is) focal length as being too long for portraits and not long enough to be interesting. With the 100 you'd have a better chance of getting good stuff if you had to stay in the stands.

So if you have a 50 how do you shoot the stuff at the other end of the court? The thing is, that you don't. Even if the 70-200 was fast enough all you'd get are a bunch of back-of-head shots from down the other end. On the baseline with the players coming at you you'll get lots of faces. Be patient and the action will come to you.

[Mchu86]

Good information guys! Thanks a lot!

Yes, I am well aware that the difference between the two lens are far more than just weight. I am also aware that the f/2.8L captures more light so a faster shutter speed can be used. That's the only reason I'm considering the f/2.8L. As far as primes go, I'm not too big on that because I prefer to have the versatility of a zoom. This lens isn't going into JUST basketball. I'm going to be using the lens as an all-around telephoto lens. I shoot for my school's newspaper so every week, I get a different assignment, usually lectures, discussions, or a sports event. So for me, having that f/2.8L will help me out a lot with some of the low light scenarios I am in a lot. I still got to think it over though. I'm leaning towards the f/2.8L right now but haven't made up my mind yet =/

[Zamora3]

when you say "soft" what exactly do you mean ?

[Eric DeCastro]

when you say "soft" what exactly do you mean ?

opposite of sharp. the only way for me to describe without pictures is like being our of focus.

[MrChad]

I've heard more then one person tell me the 70-200mm f2.8L is their favorite lens and one of the sharpest L's ever. None of my photo buds ever wants to get rid of the lens ever, it must be made of narcotics glass or something. I wish I had sometihing faster then f4 when I shoot football games...go f2.8 if your credit can afford it.

I good friend of mine has told me to buy good glass and only buy it once.
Wish I would have taken the advice to heart sooner then now :(

[Mogwyth]

"Soft" the opposite of sharp. Compared to the Canon the Sigma is not as sharp at f/2.8, compared to lessor 70-200 lenses like my old Canon 70-200 it is sharper at f/2.8 then that was at f/4. So it's all relative IMHO it's the best value lens of it's type, yes the canon is better, is it twice the price better, not in my opinion, others will disagree.

[phili1]

The 70-200 F4 will do the job. It is very sharp lens. I used it fro a Karate class where the lights are weak and it did the job hand held. In a gym you have very hot lights, so you should be ok. Now the way you test it is go with your regulare lens and put it in Av mode make your aperature F4 and see what your shutter speed is. That will tell you what to buy. If you can afford the F2.8 you also get IS with it and that is the best way to go. AS far as primes are concerened, the fast ones cost more money.

And to answer what soft is it is not the opposit of sharp, that is not an answer. It can be sharp but soft. It's like you put a lite coat of oil on your lens, you can see the detail of the image but it is just missing something. It is like what a portrait photographer somethime uses on his lens for older people, a soft focus filter. It gives the impression of being sharp but it is not.

[poke]

I have the 70 - 200 2.8L IS, and have never regretted it for a second, even though i dont shoot pro. my advice is wait until you can buy the best you can reasonably afford.

[flyfishnj]

Get that F4! They hold their value so well that you can sell it at a $40 loss in a year and upgrade if you need to!

Adam

An important point to keep in mind - 1 year rental about $40 -- pretty cheap while you save for the 2.8 Is

[Eric DeCastro]

An important point to keep in mind - 1 year rental about $40 -- pretty cheap while you save for the 2.8 Is

is it that cheap to rent? man, i'll never buy lenses again. I should just rent them.

[pcasciola]

is it that cheap to rent? man, i'll never buy lenses again. I should just rent them.

I believe he meant that you can sell the lens a year later for $40 less than you paid for it, so it's the equivalent of a $40 rental.

Either that or I didn't pick up on your sarcasm. :lol:

[Eric DeCastro]

I believe he meant that you can sell the lens a year later for $40 less than you paid for it, so it's the equivalent of a $40 rental.

Either that or I didn't pick up on your sarcasm. :lol:

no, i seriously thuoght he meant rent it for 40bucks for the year, then came the sarcasm. but i half hearted wanted it to be true. i really I would really never buy another lens again. lol.

[ijohnson]

I have the 2.8 and I love it, especially when someone is next to me with an f4. That is important to consider if you have an ego problem like me. Chuckling to yourself when you see that little f4 is worth a lot of money to me.

Just don't forget that 2.8 is twice as fast. If that f4 guy is getting 1/250 (not as fast as you need), you will get 1/500 which is more than adequate.

I promise that if you buy it, you will fondle it for months and never regret it (the fondling or the purchase).

Also, you can get the 1.4 extender and still be at f4.

And its big, which is bad when you are carrying it and very good when you are trying to get the picture you want and everyone moves out of your way.

And the lens hood is much cooler.

And the filter thread is the same size as many other lenses.

What am I leaving out? Just buy it!!!

[pcasciola]

Good information guys! Thanks a lot!

Yes, I am well aware that the difference between the two lens are far more than just weight. I am also aware that the f/2.8L captures more light so a faster shutter speed can be used. That's the only reason I'm considering the f/2.8L. As far as primes go, I'm not too big on that because I prefer to have the versatility of a zoom. This lens isn't going into JUST basketball. I'm going to be using the lens as an all-around telephoto lens. I shoot for my school's newspaper so every week, I get a different assignment, usually lectures, discussions, or a sports event. So for me, having that f/2.8L will help me out a lot with some of the low light scenarios I am in a lot. I still got to think it over though. I'm leaning towards the f/2.8L right now but haven't made up my mind yet =/

If you are looking for one lens to do all these jobs then in my opnion you should hold out for the 70-200 f/2.8L (IS if you can). The f/4L will not do the job for indoor basketball unless you can use a flash or monolights. Outdoors it's a great lens for the money.

Another option is to get the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Xr Di for around $325. That will do a much better job than any f/4 indoors, L or not, and will not be too short if you can get down on the court and are using a 1.6x camera (10D/20D/300D).

You should PM blinking8s. He takes some fantastic basketball shots, some of the best I've seen on POTN. He mostly uses the 85mm f/1.8 I believe, but he owns the 70-200mm f/4L, so ask him how it works for basketball.

In fact, he just became a SportsShooter member because of his great work at ETSU.

CONGRATS BLINKING8S!!!!!!

Here's a recent thread where he posted a bunch of great shots:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53383

[Lenny_D]

Hi,

I am also considering the 70-200m f/4 but.... there is an intersting alternative not mentioned in this thread so far: the prime 200mm f/2.8 L. It is lightweight, smaller than the 70-200, similar in price and superior in quality. I understood that it is among the best lenses ever made by Canon. It gives also the interesting possibility to use both a 1.4 and 2.0x extender without losing autofocus with still very good quality. I admit that you loose the flexibility between 70-200mm but using a zoom you often endup near 200mm.
I presently seriously consider this prime lens instead of the 70-200 f/4, think about it!
Also look at the following review:
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/dc_Canon_200_mm_f2.8/a_Canon_200_mm_f2.8L.html?page=3

Lenny

[shiningstardv]

I just thought I'd let you know, Mchu86, that I shot in a high school gym today with the 70-200mm f/4. I was getting shutter speeds of between 50th and 120th of a second (wide open), depending on what I was shooting. This was at 1600 ISO on my 20D. So basically for me this was so-so results (I wasn't shooting sports). If you want to stop action, then obviously 120th of a second isn't even close to what you'll need to get good results. Just thought I'd let you know...

[Mchu86]

I just thought I'd let you know, Mchu86, that I shot in a high school gym today with the 70-200mm f/4. I was getting shutter speeds of between 50th and 120th of a second (wide open), depending on what I was shooting. This was at 1600 ISO on my 20D. So basically for me this was so-so results (I wasn't shooting sports). If you want to stop action, then obviously 120th of a second isn't even close to what you'll need to get good results. Just thought I'd let you know...

Very good to know! Thanks a lot...that info will definitely be considered! I'm totally leaning towards the f/2.8L now...

[lmelendez]

HI there

I was in exactly in the same position, with the difference that I already made my mind. I have a DRebel, the kit lens and the 50mm f1.8. The 50mm f1.8 is the one I use all the time even though it means that I have to zoom with my legs.

I went to a basketball game a couple of weeks ago. I wanted to test the AF Servo so I borrow a zoom lens from a friend (a Sigma one, with f3.5 maximum aperture). Guess what... since the sports mode forces you to use ISO-400, I couldn't get a fast enough shutter speed to capture the action. Ended up taking the pictures with the 50mm and doing lots of work to get a so-so picture (noise removal, croping, praying, etc)

Next step, go to the forum... do some research... what I found?

- People recommending the 85mm f1.8
- People selling the 70-200 f4 L to upgrade to the f2.8 or f2.8 IS
- People saying great things about the Sigma version of the f2.8
- People saying great great things about the 70-200 f2.8 L

So... I thought that for indoor sports the 85mm would help a lot. And it is also a good lens for portraits (which is what I do the most)... but I wanted a zoom. I really wanted a zoom ... so that one was not an option for now.

The f4 version is sharp, light and really nice. I was about to buy it... but then realized that if I'm going to spend a lot of money (more than $500 in a lense is a lot of money for me) I better get the lens I really wanted (and since the rebel force me to stay at ISO-400, I need a faster lens).

But wait... I wanted the f2.8 with IS... but $1,600??? mmmm, ok.... let me see, my wife thinks it's a lot of money :(

After lots of hours of thinking about it, reading reviews and threads here... I decided to get the 70-200 f2.8 L with a dishwasher. I don't have any lense with IS so I'm hoping I'll not miss it. I will still have a family and hopefully, the speed will help my DRebel a bit during the indoor games. I'll have the zoom that I wanted and I've read that the f2.8 is good for portraits too.

I know a great lense is not going to make a great photographer. I might find that I will have to forget about the AF Servo to increase the ISO. I might think that the lense is too heavy... but at the end... If I'm going to spend money, I better expend it in the lense that I really want (without getting a divorce... of course :))

So.. if a few weeks I'll see how my new 70-200 f2.8 L with dishwasher works :D

Good luck... and remember, read a lot... try the lens if you can... and buy the one that will make you happy :)

Leo.

[aliflack]

eh? why not use P, Av, or Tv mode on your rebel and bump the iso to 800 or 1600???

[Mchu86]

Excellent info, Leo! Thank you!

[gramps]

here is an example of indoor basketball shoot with the 70 - 200 (I'm pretty sure on that I was using 3 lenses that day). I did have to do some ps work on it. As soon as the head of the household budget department gives the OK I'm ordering a 85 1.8 for indoor BB.
http://www.pbase.com/sjh/image/38609801.jpg

[pcasciola]

gramps, did you a flash and/or remote lighting for that shot, because there is a very strong shadow being cast from the upper left and it's reflecting off the seats too.

[lmelendez]

eh? why not use P, Av, or Tv mode on your rebel and bump the iso to 800 or 1600???

That's a good question. I tried that and the results of the pictures after the noise-removal software were not really good (maybe I don't know how to use it yet). And I have to confess, the AF Servo really helped me...

Everytime I think about all the pro's taking pictures without AF servo and without continuos shooting makes me wonder how much I still have to learn :)

Leo.

[lmelendez]

here is an example of indoor basketball shoot with the 70 - 200 (I'm pretty sure on that I was using 3 lenses that day). I did have to do some ps work on it. As soon as the head of the household budget department gives the OK I'm ordering a 85 1.8 for indoor BB.
http://www.pbase.com/sjh/image/38609801.jpg

Nice picture!
Did you use the f4.0 or the f2.8? Did you use a DRebel?

Leo.