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?

 
dioladetus
Senior Member
657 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 939
Joined Feb 2010
Location: DK
     
May 29, 2013 12:18 |  #76

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #15979434 (external link)
"fx" used half a dozen times,. what do you mean by that please?

oh, sorry, I mean "for example". In Denmark we just write fx, thought it was OK internationally, but will try not to make that mistake again ;)


www.phodiography.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MDJAK
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
24,722 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Nov 2004
Location: New York
     
May 29, 2013 12:51 |  #77

Btw overkill is my middle name but that's a long story

Her the lens. You will love it. I had the version I. It was awesome.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stan23
Member
88 posts
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Cupertino, CA USA!
     
May 29, 2013 13:03 |  #78

I'm with the OP on this one. He's got the $ - and we're not here to judge on how he should spend it.

If I had to pick between both, i'd pick the 200 2.0. I've had the previous version of the lens (1.8) and using it for portraits is spectacular. I can definitely see this as a primary tool for family candids and portraits if you can stomach the weight - which IMO is not that bad. I normally don't even use the hood.

I've had the 135 f/2 at various times in the past decade and it simply does not and will not compare to the 200 2.0. It's a nice lens for sure, but honestly, if you already have a 70-200 2.8 II, I see the 135 as somewhat redundant. Sure it's a little faster, but you lose IS, and the 135 needs at least (for me) 160 shutter speed to be happy. Something about it's side and weight made it somewhat difficult for me to handhold at slower than 100 shutter speeds. Some have no problems, but many feel the same as me.

At the end of the day, I think the 200 is far more manageable to pull out and shoot than the 300. The 300 (i'm lusting for right now, and I don't shoot birds either) seems like somewhat of a drag to pull out and shoot since 300 seems a bit long for portraits - but I get it - it's got a great definitive look to it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kawi_200
Goldmember
1,411 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Stanwood, WA
     
May 29, 2013 13:29 |  #79

I have the 70-200L II, 200mm f/2L IS, and 300mm f/4L IS and I love all three. I almost believe that my 70-200 is sharper at 200mm then the 200L IS is. It is just one of those things where quality control comes in to play. I'm not saying my 200L IS is unsharp. I just either got really lucky with my copy of the 70-200 II or the lens is just that good. BUT, I usually take the 200L IS out with me when I go walking around. I don't shoot portraits and whenever I try to shoot my girlfriend she always makes faces and never holds still so the shots are almost always blurry. I have considered many times maybe I should sell the 70-200, but it is so useful and sometimes the lighter weight is nice. Plus it is smaller and more inconspicuos, like at the zoo. The 200L IS also has a LOT of vignette when shooting at f/2. Sometimes it doesn't matter, and there is also post production you can do for it, Lightroom has a good lens profile to correct it.

That said, the 300mm f/4L IS is also an awesome lens. It is sharp wide open and is very light, making it very easy to handle and use (for that fast action on the beach) I'll walk around with the 200L IS for a day and not think much of it. But I also tend to shoot less, probably because the weight lifting to my face all the time. The 300mm is a lens I can take hiking and think nothing of it.

Here is a sample picture taken with one of the three lenses. Can you choose which one you think it is and what f/stop it was shot at? Yes it is a cat tail, but the framing of the cat tail is about equivalent to what a head and shoulder portrait would be on an adult.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i257.photobucke​t.com …239/kawi_200/_M​G_7503.jpg (external link)


As far as money, spend it however you feel you need to. I just bought my first house earlier this month, I shoot for fun and have made a total of less than $300 for my pictures. I had money and wanted a big ticket item. I settled for the 200L IS and it is awesome. I love it. It takes a 2x TC very well too. Although I do prefer to stop down to f/5.6 when using the 2x. I don't have a 1.4x yet, but I do plan on getting one. I'll have to wait a bit because funds will be tight now that I have a house.

5D4 | 8-15L | 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS | 24L II | 40mm pancake | 100L IS | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mk2 | 400mm f/4 DO IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joonrhee
Goldmember
Avatar
3,852 posts
Likes: 518
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Southern California
     
May 29, 2013 13:34 |  #80

Here is my take on 200IS. I have no experience on 300II.

First, 200IS is definitely sharper and in its own league when compared to 70-200II. I've recently sold the 70-200II in favor of keeping the 200IS. However when I had the 70-200II, it was much lighter and versatile I kinda used it more than the 200IS. That's one of the reasons I sold the 70-200II. I wanted to use more of 200IS. :) IQ and sharpness = 200IS, versatility = 70-200II. They are both great lenses though.

Second, 200IS takes my 1.4II very well. I see no loss in IQ when used together. I even used 1.4II and 2.0II stacked and they turn out pretty nice.

Third and most importantly, be sure to try 135L. It's one lens I would not sell as it gives a very close IQ when compared to 200IS.

From my understanding, enthusiastic and eager amateurs/hobbyists tend to have nicer gear than some pros. I don't see a problem with that. You say you'd rather spend money on photo gear when others might spend on vacations or other hobbies. I respect that and as long as you are happy without going broke, go for it. Just my 2 cents. ;)


a7RII • RX1RII • CV12 • B18 • L21 • B25 • B85
Full Gear List & Feedback
SmugMug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheLensGuy
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
598 posts
Joined Sep 2012
     
May 29, 2013 19:58 |  #81
bannedPermanent ban

I have tried using my 70-200 @ 200mm all the time today and I just realized how much I actually use the zoom's 150-199mm FLs. Not that it's a problem, it was more of an eye opener for me where I decided the 300mm FL with a prime lens would not be ideal for me. It's one thing to use the zoom @200mm "most of the time" but when you are stuck at 200mm, that's something else. Even the 200mm is challenging for me and I admit that the 200 f/2 will take time to get used to, that being said, I don't think it's impossible. I think for my purposes, 200 F/2 is perfect. The question is whether or not to keep the zoom.

Another thing I realized (again) is how my zoom has softness/CA/vignetting @ 200mm. The images I saw from 200 F/2 was nowhere near like mine.

One thing I never brought up was, I tried 4 different copies from 2 resellers over the course of a month or so when buying this lens. I have done so much testing that I don't think this is my copy that is the problem and if it is, then I don't know what to say. I have used every single ISO chart test available online and spent hours for each lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 344
Joined Sep 2011
     
May 29, 2013 20:08 as a reply to  @ TheLensGuy's post |  #82

Sounds like you should add the 200-400/4 when it comes out to your 70-200 II instead.


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 29, 2013 20:37 |  #83
bannedPermanent ban

FEChariot wrote in post #15980926 (external link)
Sounds like you should add the 200-400/4 when it comes out to your 70-200 II instead.

Very funny:)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
May 29, 2013 20:51 |  #84
bannedPermanent ban

Let's put things back in perspective - OP care to show some samples with your 70-200II that you aren't totally satisfy with?

imo buy whatever that pleases you, overkill or not is totally subjective. I'd get the 200f2IS in a heartbeat if I can afford it.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DanAnCan
Senior Member
Avatar
387 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
     
May 29, 2013 21:09 |  #85

1. Perhaps a 135L ? Sharp lens, quick AF, fast F2, light compared to your 70-200? About $1100 vs $6k+. Similiar dof if you get close and reframe the subject the same as with the 300mm

2. I also did just pick up a sigma 300 2.8 recently . And I have to say if you're outside and have the space, the dof is razor thin, and you obliterate the backround at f2.8.

Hey, if you use it and like it, it's not overkill. Enjoy! But everyone will give you comments on the size of a 300mm 2.8 prime!!


Canon 5D3/5D2/8-15L/24-70LII/Σ35/85LII/135L/200L F2/Σ300 EX DG/EF TC 1.4 & 2X III/EX580 II/ PCB Busy Bee Kit

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kawi_200
Goldmember
1,411 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Stanwood, WA
     
May 29, 2013 23:10 |  #86

Comparison between the 200mm f/2L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Both wide open and unedited. For me, I honestly think the 70-200L II is really holding its own against the legendary 200L IS. Colors and contrast are certainly better on the 70-200L II. What do you all think?

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8228/8427876182_2ff4d7a2fc_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/fmix84/84278761​82/  (external link)
200mm f/2L IS (external link) by kawi_200 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8493/8426787455_d3b13d3e19_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/fmix84/84267874​55/  (external link)
70-200mm f/2.8L IS II (external link) by kawi_200 (external link), on Flickr

5D4 | 8-15L | 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS | 24L II | 40mm pancake | 100L IS | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mk2 | 400mm f/4 DO IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
silvex
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,307 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 42
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Southern California, USA
     
May 29, 2013 23:22 |  #87

kawi_200 wrote in post #15981351 (external link)
Comparison between the 200mm f/2L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Both wide open and unedited. For me, I honestly think the 70-200L II is really holding its own against the legendary 200L IS. Colors and contrast are certainly better on the 70-200L II. What do you all think?


200mm f/2L IS (external link) by kawi_200 (external link), on Flickr


70-200mm f/2.8L IS II (external link) by kawi_200 (external link), on Flickr

Agree...the 200L being f/2.0 it will have less contrast...pixel peepers will have a feast analyzing blades of grass and dirt molecules... :) . In real life publications (web, magazines, newspaper) they will be no difference...;)


.
-Ed
CPS Platinum Member.
Canon Gear
SilvexPhoto.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
auto-clicker
Senior Member
784 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Dec 2009
     
May 29, 2013 23:23 |  #88

For street and portraiture i would just use 2 primes a 28/35 and a 85




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bianchi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,007 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6582
Joined Jan 2010
Location: USA
     
May 30, 2013 00:40 as a reply to  @ auto-clicker's post |  #89

After 6 pages into this thread, I am surprized no one recommened spending a hundred bucks and buy a gold membership to the CPS . For that, you have unlimited use of all of Canon lenses (2 at a time)...and 2 camera cleaning per year.

Borrow the 200 and 300, return, then borrow the 400 & 500
You will answer your own questions...

Happy shooting..

Silvex, sweet shots with those little primes.. Betcha your a poparazzi shooting the stars in LA :)


My Gear flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 344
Joined Sep 2011
     
May 30, 2013 02:13 |  #90

TheLensGuy wrote in post #15981015 (external link)
Very funny:)

Actually I was being serious. If you use the 150-200 range a lot, you might also use the 201-299 range too. Maybe the flexability of the zoom would be nice for you.


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

13,263 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 336london
977 guests, 286 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.