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 26 May 2013 (Sunday) 15:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is 300 2.8 II overkill for me?

 
TheLensGuy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
598 posts
Joined Sep 2012
     
May 27, 2013 08:01 |  #16
bannedPermanent ban

DamianOz wrote in post #15971294 (external link)
Just because one doesn't generate an income, doesn't mean they shouldn't or don't strive for the best.

I too love the 200 f/2 and the older F1.8 from the results I've seen, I cant offer experience with either option, but I can relate to your desire.

+1.

Everyone is different and ever since switching to 5D Mark III and started buying L glass, I can clearly see the difference in quality. It might take me 2 months or 2 years to come to terms with spending 6k on a glass, but when the time is right, I want to be ready to pull the trigger. I really don't want this thread to turn into why L glass or tele primes are waste of money for non-professionals so I'd like to not go into any further discussion regarding this:)

Someone made a comment about the weight of 200 F2.0 and how it would not be trivial to carry it around all day. I see that it's about 2 lbs heavier than my 70-200 IS II, and I don't think that'd be a problem (I'm a pretty muscular guy:P).

My only worry with 200/2 is it's a bit older model than 300 2.8 II and I'd be going nuts if Canon replaced it a year after I buy it with all the new features (like the 3rd IS Mode).

I do wish that there was a way to try out these new lenses without having to pay hundreds of dollars (I just think renting a lens is such an expensive thing that gets close to being a waste of money [UNLESS you do it for business where you can offset that cost with the money you make]). I wonder if I were to stop by B&H/Adorama, would they let me try one on in the store?

Lastly, are there any real life shots that compare 70-200/2.8 to 200/2. I'm curious to see 2 things, the difference of F2.0 vs F2.8 in terms of DOF and the IQ at the same aperture. I know that prime is a full stop faster which might mean the difference of ISO 6400 vs 12800 or 1/500th vs 1/1000th, which is a huge difference, but how does that full stop translate into real world photos when there is plenty of light? For instance, My 85L produces such photos that I can easily tell they were shot with that lens and not with a zoom, but then that's F1.2, a full 2 1/3 stops faster than 2.8. There isn't that much difference between F2.0 and F2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,381 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 274
Joined May 2005
     
May 27, 2013 11:24 |  #17

casaaviocar wrote in post #15969771 (external link)
If you can afford it, and feel you need/want it, then get it. 300 is long for portraits, but if it's more street, anonymous shots where you aren't close, then it'll certainly work. Maybe buy a 300 f/4 used from here or KEH and see if the DOF will work for you. I've owned that lens and it was a great lens that didn't cost too much.

I find it funny to hear the word "anonymous" with the 300 IS II :D

The 300 IS F4 is a very good lens though.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
May 27, 2013 14:42 as a reply to  @ Buckeye1's post |  #18

Holy crap. A 300/2.8 II for hobby use. Maybe it's just me but I would much rather buy the 300/4 IS and take the extra $5500 and invest it so I can shorten my time until retirement some.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheLensGuy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
598 posts
Joined Sep 2012
     
May 27, 2013 15:40 |  #19
bannedPermanent ban

FEChariot wrote in post #15972723 (external link)
Holy crap. A 300/2.8 II for hobby use. Maybe it's just me but I would much rather buy the 300/4 IS and take the extra $5500 and invest it so I can shorten my time until retirement some.

Sorry, I didn't come here for investment advice for my retirement:) These type of comments are really not what I was looking for. Where I live, that $5500 will pay for 1 month of mortgage + car payment (barely if it does), you need to understand, it's a big country (world) and not everyone lives the same way.

The same argument can be said for 70-200 F4 vs 70-200 2.8 (let alone II) and we all know there is significant IQ difference between those two lenses. I'm no expert, but I'd say the 200 F2.0 with 1.4 extender would be better than 300 F4. There is a reason why the 300 F4 costs less than a 35L:) In fact, I might as well get the extender NOW and use it with my 70-200 and get similar results to 300 F4.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DocFrankenstein
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,324 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2004
Location: where the buffalo roam
     
May 27, 2013 15:58 |  #20

TheLensGuy wrote in post #15972908 (external link)
Sorry, I didn't come here for investment advice for my retirement:) These type of comments are really not what I was looking for. Where I live, that $5500 will pay for 1 month of mortgage + car payment (barely if it does), you need to understand, it's a big country (world) and not everyone lives the same way.

The same argument can be said for 70-200 F4 vs 70-200 2.8 (let alone II) and we all know there is significant IQ difference between those two lenses. I'm no expert, but I'd say the 200 F2.0 with 1.4 extender would be better than 300 F4. There is a reason why the 300 F4 costs less than a 35L:) In fact, I might as well get the extender NOW and use it with my 70-200 and get similar results to 300 F4.

Life is short. If you want to, get it.

I'm in a similar situation. The taxes and bills every month dwarf any expense on a hobby. And years go by with the money you earn going the wrong way, but the stuff we want is delayed indefinitely. I'm sure there's a more "practical" way to spend the money, but if the money is YOURS and that's what YOU want to do, then by all means pull the trigger.


National Sarcasm Society. Like we need your support.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
May 27, 2013 15:59 |  #21

TheLensGuy wrote in post #15972908 (external link)
Sorry, I didn't come here for investment advice for my retirement:) These type of comments are really not what I was looking for. Where I live, that $5500 will pay for 1 month of mortgage + car payment (barely if it does), you need to understand, it's a big country (world) and not everyone lives the same way.

The same argument can be said for 70-200 F4 vs 70-200 2.8 (let alone II) and we all know there is significant IQ difference between those two lenses. I'm no expert, but I'd say the 200 F2.0 with 1.4 extender would be better than 300 F4. There is a reason why the 300 F4 costs less than a 35L:) In fact, I might as well get the extender NOW and use it with my 70-200 and get similar results to 300 F4.

You asked if a 300/2.8 II was overkill for a hobbyist. I am telling you yes. And BTW your monthly listed expenses are not much higher than mine and I still wouldn't spend that much on a lens.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,459 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 38
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
May 27, 2013 16:23 |  #22

FEChariot wrote in post #15972723 (external link)
Holy crap. A 300/2.8 II for hobby use. Maybe it's just me but I would much rather buy the 300/4 IS and take the extra $5500 and invest it so I can shorten my time until retirement some.

I completely agree! It's nice to hear someone plan for the future, and isn't affraid to talk about it.

Cheers,

David


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 424
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 27, 2013 16:49 |  #23

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #15972950 (external link)
Life is short. If you want to, get it.

I'm in a similar situation. The taxes and bills every month dwarf any expense on a hobby. And years go by with the money you earn going the wrong way, but the stuff we want is delayed indefinitely. I'm sure there's a more "practical" way to spend the money, but if the money is YOURS and that's what YOU want to do, then by all means pull the trigger.

i'm in a dissimilar situation. my house is paid for. I have no children. no bills. no ex-wives and the wife i do have is young and likes to work ;)!


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,082 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 424
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 27, 2013 16:53 |  #24

FEChariot wrote in post #15972953 (external link)
You asked if a 300/2.8 II was overkill for a hobbyist. I am telling you yes. And BTW your monthly listed expenses are not much higher than mine and I still wouldn't spend that much on a lens.

most guys would get tired of carrying it. before we went to katmai NP I interviewed a couple of big primes -- 300L and 500L -- and even bought the 300L but returned it after I realized I hated carrying it and realizing I would need to use it with a TC a lot..

I instead took my 100-400L, the same lens that I used on safari in Africa. no regrets. when the 100-400L II comes out I will get it but other than occasional use the big primes aren't a want or necessity for me.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mileslong24
Senior Member
508 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jun 2011
     
May 27, 2013 17:04 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #25

I love when people get worked up over other people spending money. Especially when these high end tele's hold value REALLY well. You could buy that 300 2.8 II and probably sell it after a year for a minimal loss. Honestly it would probably cost you more to rent the lens 2 or 3 times than it would to buy and resell it. If you have the means.....get it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DocFrankenstein
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,324 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2004
Location: where the buffalo roam
     
May 27, 2013 19:56 |  #26

ed rader wrote in post #15973082 (external link)
i'm in a dissimilar situation. my house is paid for. I have no children. no bills. no ex-wives and the wife i do have is young and likes to work ;)!

No need to rub it in. :lol:


National Sarcasm Society. Like we need your support.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,459 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 38
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
May 27, 2013 20:24 |  #27

mileslong24 wrote in post #15973137 (external link)
I love when people get worked up over other people spending money. Especially when these high end tele's hold value REALLY well. You could buy that 300 2.8 II and probably sell it after a year for a minimal loss. Honestly it would probably cost you more to rent the lens 2 or 3 times than it would to buy and resell it. If you have the means.....get it.

I don't believe anyone is getting worked up about it, but the usual response from suggestions about recommending saving money ends in "don't tell me how to spend my money". ;) Not quite sure why it goes that direction... I for one would be appreciative of the advice, but there's a segment that really dis-likes/loathes those type of recommendations.

I have my theories as to why, but is left for another conversation on a different board.

Back to the lens in question... There's little doubt it's going to hold it's value, unless damaged/lost or stolen. So, one could buy a copy and sell it 5 years down the road for nearly what one paid. L lenses really hold thier value well - no doubt.


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheLensGuy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
598 posts
Joined Sep 2012
     
May 28, 2013 07:22 |  #28
bannedPermanent ban

davidc502 wrote in post #15973693 (external link)
I don't believe anyone is getting worked up about it, but the usual response from suggestions about recommending saving money ends in "don't tell me how to spend my money". ;) Not quite sure why it goes that direction... I for one would be appreciative of the advice, but there's a segment that really dis-likes/loathes those type of recommendations.

I have my theories as to why, but is left for another conversation on a different board.

Back to the lens in question... There's little doubt it's going to hold it's value, unless damaged/lost or stolen. So, one could buy a copy and sell it 5 years down the road for nearly what one paid. L lenses really hold thier value well - no doubt.

Actually if people stopped focusing on my money spending habits and started reading the thread carefully :), I changed my question to include 200 F2.0 (OR 300 2.8), I couldn't however change the title of the thread. I have read wonderful things about the 200 F2.0 and from the sample picture thread in this forum, I see that it's in a league of its own compared to 70-200 MK2. I was thinking of selling my zoom and get 200 F2.0 and use that. I'm not sure if 300 2.8 II will be very useful for me for my use cases. I do shoot portraits/street photography and I truly see the value of being able to stand 20 meters away in the playground to frame my kid, I just don't know if there is something I am missing. I know 300 is long I just don't know how much longer it is than 200.

Why I bring 300 2.8 II into the equation is, it's a much newer lens design and I don't want to spend 6k on 200 F2.0 and then a year later have an "older" version lens that Canon stops supporting (like they did to 200/1.8). I know you will say when the new one comes out the old one will be more expensive and lenses are good investments and you are probably right, it's just human nature when you think about shelling out 6-7k, you want to make sure you get the best lens possible:) I also know each FL is different, but I seem to remember that as you go high in the FL, especially past 150mm, in a full frame camera, a difference of 50-60mm is not that much (in terms of perspective). That's why I am comparing two lenses. I'm not sure if the difference between 200mm and 300mm is as big as the difference between 24mm and 85mm.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dioladetus
Senior Member
657 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 939
Joined Feb 2010
Location: DK
     
May 28, 2013 07:29 |  #29

MakisM1 wrote in post #15970050 (external link)
Have you considered a late model crop to complement your 5D3? You get slightly longer reach than a converter without the loss of one f-stop. Price-wise you save money over the purchase of a 300 and the crop purchase is comparable to a converter... Just a thought...

that is a truth with modifications. You look through a smaller "window", and you also let in ~1 stop less light because of the smaller sensor.


www.phodiography.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,552 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 335
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
May 28, 2013 07:36 |  #30

dioladetus wrote in post #15974805 (external link)
that is a truth with modifications. You look through a smaller "window", and you also let in ~1 stop less light because of the smaller sensor.

The light intensity and therefore the required f-stop goes with the sensor square footage...;) So it is the same f-stop for large format, FF or crop.

As a matter of fact, if you want to nitpick, for most lenses there is a light fall-off at the corners, something you do not experience with the crops because.... you crop!:D

So, on the average you get more light per square foot...:rolleyes:


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

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

12,863 views & 0 likes for this thread
Is 300 2.8 II overkill for me?
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 Preseli
930 guests, 304 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.