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 16 Mar 2013 (Saturday) 18:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Opinions? 70-200 2.8 or 200 2.8?

 
mickeyb105
Goldmember
Avatar
2,570 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1645
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Mar 21, 2013 22:21 |  #16

I use my 100 f/2 & 200 2.8 setup to shoot sports and I am very happy with the IQ . . . Especially given that they cost me a combined $850 shipped--they both were like new.

If you added the 200 2.8 your setup would be similar to mine, but I ask myself if I would be okay shooting a wedding with that combo with no second body. I'm not sure, but what I do know is that my 200 gives me drop-dead IQ and ultrasonic AF for just over $500. There are a lot like-new copies of this lens up for sale due to people not just not using them.

Would you consider a budget 2nd body? What do you use now?


Sony A7RIII, Tamron 28mm 2.8 Di III OSD M1:2, Sonnar T* FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA, Canon 200mm 2.8L ii, Sigma MC-11, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TSchrief
Goldmember
Avatar
2,099 posts
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Bourbon, Indiana
     
Mar 22, 2013 00:19 |  #17
bannedPermanent ban

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15722504 (external link)
Flexibility with that focal range is very handy, especially in wedding situations. Considering your intended use, I wouldn't even consider a non-IS version of the 70-200mm. If you can afford it, go straight to the 70-200 2.8 IS II. If not, get the Sigma 70-200 OS.

+1.

I had the 135L and 200 2.8L. I sold them both for a Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS HSM. Versatility and IS are nice.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elicious
Member
130 posts
Joined Jan 2012
Location: San Diego, CA
     
Mar 22, 2013 01:57 |  #18

If you're serious about shooting weddings professionally then you are going to HAVE TO buy/rent/borrow a 2nd body! Consider that cost vs explaining to the newlyweds that you were not able to capture images of the most important moments of their life because your camera broke/died/fell during the shoot.

Once 2 cameras are in the mix, the issue of lens-swapping becomes less significant as you can have a long lens on one body and a shorter focal length on the other.

IMHO, of course. ;)


5D3 | 24-105L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Zivnuska
Goldmember
Avatar
3,684 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Likes: 649
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Wichita, Kansas
     
Mar 22, 2013 04:42 |  #19

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15722504 (external link)
Flexibility with that focal range is very handy, especially in wedding situations. Considering your intended use, I wouldn't even consider a non-IS version of the 70-200mm. If you can afford it, go straight to the 70-200 2.8 IS II.

The 70-200mm 2.8L IS II is a terrific lens. Much better than the original version which I owned for many years.


www.zivnuska.zenfolio.​com/blog (external link) = My Blog
Gear List
www.zivnuska.zenfolio.​com (external link)

"It's not tight until you see the color of the irides."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Orenishii
Member
30 posts
Joined Nov 2012
     
Mar 22, 2013 04:55 |  #20

If you're low on funds you could go for a 70-200mm f2.8 non IS(OS) this will save you a lot of money, then just get yourself a decent mono pod for stability as you can pan and tilt. Also its very easy to switch from portrait to landscape with the tripod or in this case the mono pod lens ring. That's how I'm doing weddings at the moment. and if you dare you can go down as far as 30th of a sec with this setup in low light. Obviously I'm aiming for the canon 70-200mm II IS when I get a few more pennies.

Both these where shot at 30th of a sec with the above setup

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5257/5533179445_cb62aa61dd.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lemon-tea/5533179445/  (external link)
Elywn and Hayley - Evening-8630 (external link) by Lemon-Tea (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5300/5533142639_48f7705cf9.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lemon-tea/5533142639/  (external link)
Elywn and Hayley - Evening-8606 (external link) by Lemon-Tea (external link), on Flickr

Canon 7D, EF-S: 17-55mm IS/ 10-22mm/ EF: 45mm TSE/ Sigma 70-200mm macro II / Sigma 30mm f1.4
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nellas
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
438 posts
Joined Feb 2005
     
Mar 22, 2013 09:43 |  #21

Thank you so so much for the tips and input everyone. You all are incredibly nice and helpful.

Well, I just wanted to update everyone......after much debate and research, I did decide on the 200 prime and it arrived yesterday. WOW, I can tell the glass is high quality just by holding it. It's heavy. :P I can not wait to go out and test it!!! When it came down to it, I mostly just wanted the 200 mm range and won't be using 70-100 or so since I already have the 85 mm prime. So the cost to basically get only the 100-200 range seemed ridiculous to me, but my 2 main concerns were: 1. I wasn't thrilled with the idea of carrying around a white lens that screams "LOOK AT ME I AM EXPENSIVE!" and 2. I am a petite female and equipment weight is definitely an issue. I know I'll be thrilled with the prime and will do exactly what you said, bwfishing, in regards to free-roaming in the back. I understand that a zoom has more flexibility for most, but my personal preference seems to be primes. Also, I purchased the Tokina 11-16 2.8 and the price of that plus the 200 prime was the same as one 70-200 2.8 without IS. It was a no brainer!

Regarding the 2nd body, you all are spot on with that suggestion and I do plan to get that, but am doing a little at a time heh. I'm just starting out with getting my feet wet regarding weddings, so feel it would be beneficial to get a few under my belt before delving into it "full boar" with buying another body.

I do thank you all once again and perhaps I'll put up some test photos some time!


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TSchrief
Goldmember
Avatar
2,099 posts
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Bourbon, Indiana
     
Mar 22, 2013 10:17 |  #22
bannedPermanent ban

The 200 2.8L is a really nice lens. Enjoy you choice.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bwfishing
Member
185 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 23, 2013 18:09 |  #23

@Nelles, all the best to you with the two new lenses! I just got back from using my EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM for the first time at a wildlife photo event. If your interested here is a link to one of my first shots.

http://www.flickr.com …8582669791/in/p​hotostream (external link)


-Bruce

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
effstop
Senior Member
810 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: San Diego
     
Mar 23, 2013 18:40 |  #24

I had a 200mm 2.8 and foolishly sold it to fund another lens with more reach. The AF is uber fast and has wonderful IQ. Enjoy your lens!


5D MKI | 1D MKII | 24-70mm 2.8 L | 80-200MM 2.8 L | 400mm 5.6 L |50mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nellas
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
438 posts
Joined Feb 2005
     
Mar 23, 2013 18:59 |  #25

Thanks everyone!

bwfishing: WOW, those are some amazing shots you have in your gallery and talk about high quality too You have me even more excited to try it out now. Going to test tomorrow. :D


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bwfishing
Member
185 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 24, 2013 09:22 as a reply to  @ Nellas's post |  #26

@Nellas thanks for the truly kind words and taking time out to look. I'm really happy with the lens. It was cold rainy and the heavily wooded area made lighting a really challenge. I thought they were going to cancel the event due to the weather, only a few folks actually came this time. I had my rain sleeve a waterproof tripod and a telephoto lens that could take shots at f2.8. I even got useable shots of a The"Great" Horned Owl you saw in the link in flight @ f2.8 handheld in a somewhat poor lighting of a heavily forest area. I want to photoshop the creance out. (A creance is a long light cord used to tether a flying bird of prey during training.) Anyway this is truly a really great lens and I hope to see your results too!


-Bruce

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
webstrang
Member
36 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Folsom, Ca
     
Mar 25, 2013 15:34 |  #27

go with the zoom




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bwfishing
Member
185 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2013
     
Sep 04, 2013 12:22 |  #28

Or not :-)


-Bruce

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,533 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
Sep 04, 2013 14:11 |  #29

Great choice! The 200mm 2.8 is my favorite lens. Lightweight, black and unobtrusive with great IQ.




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

5,245 views & 0 likes for this thread
Opinions? 70-200 2.8 or 200 2.8?
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 Mareseatoats
289 guests, 225 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.