Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 15 Dec 2011 (Thursday) 14:15
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Need Some Advice

 
Faith279
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Jan 2011
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:15 |  #1

Got the wife the 7D last year for Xmas and she loves the camera. We were just at a Xmas show for the grandkids in the back of an auditorium and she complained about not getting very close shots with 24-105 so I thought about another lens. Which would be a better alternative 100-400L IS or 70-300L IS? The 100-400 seems to be twice as heavy.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
huntersdad
Goldmember
4,848 posts
Likes: 611
Joined Nov 2008
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:26 |  #2

The bigger question is were was she ISO wise. That 24-105 is f/4 compared to both of the others being f/5.6 - requiring more light. If it was slightly short I'd recommend one of the 70-200 2.8s. If she was really short and pushing the ISO envelope on the 7d (around 3200 or 6400 usable), then the only help would be moving closer.


Facebook (external link)

http://WWW.BLENDEDLIGH​TPHOTOGRAPHY.COM (external link)
1DxIII x 2 / 24 1.4 II / Sigma 35 1.4 / 85 1.4L / 70-200L II / 300 II / AD600Pros

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rrudo74901
Member
Avatar
93 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:32 as a reply to  @ huntersdad's post |  #3

I agree, the reach of the 100-400 is great but you will have to really push the ISO to get shutter speed up.
I recently took some shots at my son's school event in a dark auditorium and the 24-70 2.8 needed ISO 6400 to get 1/100 and that was using a 1D M4.
Maybe even a 135mm f2 would be a better choice. That would place the FOV at 216 mm.
Or and 85mm 1.8?


1D Mark IV / 7D / 50mm 1.4 / 24-70mm 2.8 L / 24-105mm L / 100-400mm L IS / 300mm 2.8 L IS / 1.4 III TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twoshadows
Liquid Nitrogen
Avatar
7,060 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3321
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Between the palms and the pines.
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:44 |  #4

I really liked the 300 f/4 IS for stage work when I had it. Lighter than the f/2.8 70-200's with 50% more reach. It is f/4, but I never found that to be limiting. Let me know if you would like to see samples :) .


xgender.net (external link) Miss Julia Grey (she/her/Miss)
OST, API, PPP & MLI explained (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Faith279
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Jan 2011
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:50 as a reply to  @ twoshadows's post |  #5

Not sure where she was ISO but I do know she is just a point and shoot girl so she probably wouldn't even have a clue as to what I was talking about. She would like something that she can get a close up when at a distance and doesn't have to think about ISO




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
30,277 posts
Gallery: 299 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8974
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:53 |  #6

70-200 2.8 IS, or perhaps a 200 2.8. If the budget allows pairing a 135L with a 1.4 extender is a nice recipe. You have a great portrait lens in the 135L, and its still great with the 1.4 and it only costs you a stop.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
James ­ P
Goldmember
Avatar
1,909 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 225
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Chatham, Ontario, Canada
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:58 |  #7

Forget about the 100-400 for low light indoor shots. It's not the lens you need.


1Dx - 5DIII - 40D - Canon 24-70LII, 100L macro, 135L, 16-35L, 70-200 f4 and 100-400L lenses

- "Very good" is the enemy of "great." Sometimes we confuse the two.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Dec 15, 2011 15:13 |  #8

Faith279 wrote in post #13550172 (external link)
Not sure where she was ISO but I do know she is just a point and shoot girl so she probably wouldn't even have a clue as to what I was talking about. She would like something that she can get a close up when at a distance and doesn't have to think about ISO

What is more important, getting good shots of the grandkids or not having to worry about exposure details? You can throw money at the system by adding an expensive lens like the 70-200 2.8 IS, but that is no guarantee of good results in challenging conditions.

By all means, get the 70-200 2.8 since it sounds like both extra speed and reach are warranted (the 70-300L and 100-400L have more reach but will be too slow for almost all indoor auditoriums), but I would recommend spending an extra $20 or so to get a good book on the basics, such as Understanding Exposure.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snyderman
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,084 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Wadsworth, Ohio
     
Dec 15, 2011 15:26 |  #9

another vote on the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. Something to really keep in mind: It's HEAVY. My standard sports shooting rig was a 7D w/batter grip and extra battery and the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. Toting it around during each football game confirmed this.

dave


Canon 5D2 > 35L-85L-135L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twoshadows
Liquid Nitrogen
Avatar
7,060 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3321
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Between the palms and the pines.
     
Dec 15, 2011 15:34 |  #10

Yeah. Ya gotta think about iso.

shutter speed
aperture
iso

all affect exposure


xgender.net (external link) Miss Julia Grey (she/her/Miss)
OST, API, PPP & MLI explained (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twoshadows
Liquid Nitrogen
Avatar
7,060 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3321
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Between the palms and the pines.
     
Dec 15, 2011 15:42 |  #11

After re-reading your post, OP, I think it should be pointed out if she wants close ups the back of the auditorium isn't going to work. Even with the 300mm lens on a 1.6x crop body (7d) you would need to be within the first , say, 20-25 rows. TBH, if I was stuck at the back of the auditorium I would call it a day and rely on my eyes, ears and brain to record those precious moments. ;)


xgender.net (external link) Miss Julia Grey (she/her/Miss)
OST, API, PPP & MLI explained (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Faith279
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Jan 2011
     
Dec 15, 2011 15:50 as a reply to  @ twoshadows's post |  #12

If the 70-200 is that heavy, I know she would never use it. What would be a good alternative? You know the saying, if grandma is not happy no one is




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Dec 15, 2011 16:34 |  #13

Faith279 wrote in post #13550541 (external link)
If the 70-200 is that heavy, I know she would never use it. What would be a good alternative? You know the saying, if grandma is not happy no one is

200L (the f2.8 version, not the f2 version)

the 135L is an option as well, but it doesn't have much of a reach advantage over the 24-105 unless you use it with a 1.4x teleconverter.

Both of these lenses are going to be more challenging to use for someone that is not interested in understanding the components of exposure. Neither has IS, and since it is likely that shutter speeds will be marginal at best in a poorly lit auditorium with a mystery ISO setting, the likelihood of getting blurry but zoomed in pictures goes up even farther.

Shooting long(er) focal lengths in low light is always a challenge. Doing it right requires the right gear (which is often large/heavy) and an understanding of how to use that gear.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
svarley
Senior Member
Avatar
592 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Mar 2009
Location: LA, CA
     
Dec 15, 2011 17:28 |  #14

There's no such thing as a LONG, FAST & LIGHT lens. Add in CHEAP too.

How's about a 200 f2.8? Really not heavy, it's black to its unobtrusive but she'll have to change lenses. Some people are weird about that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,342 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 201
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
Dec 15, 2011 17:32 |  #15

twoshadows wrote in post #13550490 (external link)
After re-reading your post, OP, I think it should be pointed out if she wants close ups the back of the auditorium isn't going to work. Even with the 300mm lens on a 1.6x crop body (7d) you would need to be within the first , say, 20-25 rows. TBH, if I was stuck at the back of the auditorium I would call it a day and rely on my eyes, ears and brain to record those precious moments. ;)

I agree....


My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,726 views & 0 likes for this thread
Need Some Advice
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
840 guests, 204 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.