Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mark II

very nice. Love the dramatic lighting and tone of the first..

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …g_photography/6​304040537/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …g_photography/6​304039041/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …g_photography/6​304030703/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …g_photography/6​304555680/

Last evening opened my indoor wrestling coverage in North Central Pennsylvania. Shooting with available light useing all the ISO I had or 1600. AV F/2.8. I used a monopod with the IS turned off. My post work was using CS4 to deliver twenty nine of nearly a hundred attempts for my best work. Still using the Rebel XTi.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

docgipe wrote in post #13343982
Last evening opened my indoor wrestling coverage in North Central Pennsylvania. Shooting with available light useing all the ISO I had or 1600. AV F/2.8. I used a monopod with the IS turned off. My post work was using CS4 to deliver twenty nine of nearly a hundred attempts for my best work. Still using the Rebel XTi.

These shots are at ISO 800. They would benefit from 1600 to get the shutter speed higher in my opinion as there is a lot of motion blur.

That said, to handle this level of light and action you may need lower than a 2.8 to get really crisp shots. It's a tough sport to photograph!

Acute Exposure wrote in post #13344091
These shots are at ISO 800. They would benefit from 1600 to get the shutter speed higher in my opinion as there is a lot of motion blur.

That said, to handle this level of light and action you may need lower than a 2.8 to get really crisp shots. It's a tough sport to photograph!

I goofed....I had 1600 and failed to use it. Never the less I still need the 7D behind this great lens to do as well as I can do. Thank you for the one upsmanship. I appreciate any comments. Tomorrow I have another shoot same place same conditions. I will be at 1600 tomorrow.

docgipe wrote in post #13344287
I goofed....I had 1600 and failed to use it. Never the less I still need the 7D behind this great lens to do as well as I can do. Thank you for the one upsmanship. I appreciate any comments. Tomorrow I have another shoot same place same conditions. I will be at 1600 tomorrow.

I certainly wasn't trying to one up you, just wanted to give you my honest feedback. I'm not shooting professionally so take it for what it is worth.

I got back on the wrong forum again. I simply seem to miss the "L". Sorry.

docgipe wrote in post #13344287
I goofed....I had 1600 and failed to use it. Never the less I still need the 7D behind this great lens to do as well as I can do. Thank you for the one upsmanship. I appreciate any comments. Tomorrow I have another shoot same place same conditions. I will be at 1600 tomorrow.

I think you certainly deserve 10/10 for effort. You always seem to do these tough shoots and I know you don't have the mobility that most posters on here enjoy.

'More power to you elbow', as we say back here in Britain

Geordie Amanda wrote in post #13344486
I think you certainly deserve 10/10 for effort. You always seem to do these tough shoots and I know you don't have the mobility that most posters on here enjoy.

'More power to you elbow', as we say back here in Britain

I have a grandson who is 16 and one of our states finest wrestlers. I choose to follow the sports of his choice. I'm fine and pity those who do not keep on keeping on doing the best of anything they can do.

jakeg1999 wrote in post #13343008
Damn, I am so torn right now. I can't decide on whether or not to sell my Zeiss 50/2 and 135L and get this lens or keep what I have. What I know is that I struggle to like the 50mm FL, but love the photos it produces. My favorite FL is 35mm, and for that I have the Zeiss 35/2. I am going to Dland Monday for the week, and I want to decide in the next 5 hours because I can get the 70-200 shipped in time......I had the f/4 for a couple years, and while it produced amazing photos, I rarely used it except for sports, and animals, which I rarely shot. However my daughter is getting older and sports will be more previlent. Sad thing is that I really have not had much chance to use my 135L either as I have been doing a lot of studio work with my 85L. I do a wide range of shooting, but I would say indoor/wide portrait/family photos and outdoor family portraiture is where I spend most my time. I just got my 24-70 back from Canon that I traded a 17-40 for and it was not in the good shape I was told it was. However Canon made some repairs, and it's hard for me to say this, but I am struggling to find a difference between sharpness in it and my beloved 35L that I sold to get the Zeiss. It's by far the sharpest zoom I have ever had.....Being a prime nut, I am starting to look at the zooms differently after this 24-70 and the new 70/200. I have a bit of a new outlook on zooms. At first I loved what a prime forced me to do as a photographer, but now that I have that mentality I can still use it with a zoom which is several primes in one, that just can't go below 2.8....but my 85 can, and I will get the 35Lii if it's ever born...I am sorry for the rant in this thread, but I guess I am looking for some thoughts. I hope this next statement isn't offensive, but a lot of the threads I see about lenses read as though some folks are just trying to justify to themselves why they spent so much on a certain lens. While I have done the same myself, I think I am looking for some more neutral feedback.....I am sure though that having spent that kind of money on it, it would force me to use it more......sorry again for the rant....Jake

Jake, I think I understand your feelings. It's a big decision, no doubt, and I was pretty skeptical myself. Of course I'm still riding on that crest of initial excitement now, so what I say has to be taken with a grain of salt, but when I saw my first pictures on my monitor, I felt I had made the right decision. Like you I'm going to keep my 85 (Sigma), for indoor, low light stuff (and because I love it) but my 135 almost immediately lost it's charms. This is as good as the 135 at 135, although with slightly different characteristics. I wouldn't rush into it, though, right before a trip. Can't you rent it somewhere? Or at least go to a shop and put one on your camera? It's not a subtle lens, that's for sure. Right now, for me, that is it's only weakness.

gokusan1972 wrote in post #13343062
Very nice.

Thanks

Well.....it's almost too late....I sold my two lenses, and just have to move some funds around,then I am going to order it overnight ($4) through Amazon tomorrow.....Believe it or not, I am looking forward to moving down to 4 working lenses, as I don't like to have lenses not being used. I can't wait to try her out.......

jakeg1999 wrote in post #13344774
Well.....it's almost too late....I sold my two lenses, and just have to move some funds around,then I am going to order it overnight ($4) through Amazon tomorrow.....Believe it or not, I am looking forward to moving down to 4 working lenses, as I don't like to have lenses not being used. I can't wait to try her out.......

Wow, you move fast! Anyway, I think you'll be happy. Funny, too, how much I agree with everything you are saying. I've been putting ALL my disposable income into lenses for the last year. I'm planning to part with 3-4 as well (after having picked up this big boy).

I know, I think we do feel the same about these lenses. I think for now, I am going to stick with my Zeiss 35, 24-70, 85L, and 70-200. I have a Rokinon 8mm fish for rare occasions, and will add or replace the ZE when the 35Lii is or if it is ever made....

my life source...

POTN needs like buttons for posts. ^ very nice.