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 29 Jul 2013 (Monday) 19:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

To Get L or Not?

 
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Jul 30, 2013 12:17 |  #16

Get a 70-200/4 IS.... It's a great lens, very sharp, fast focusing, excellent color and L-series build, sealing and durability. You'll want to use "Mode 2" IS for those panned shots. Don't worry about possible future FF... if you get one, you can continue to use the 70-200 and simply get a longer lens to go with it. Or just stick with crop cameras (which have some advantages over FF unless you are regularly making really big prints or doing really high ISO work).

Compared to the 70-200/2.8 IS II, this would leave considerable money in the bank or to use toward other lenses. For example, you might want to check out a Canon 10-22mm to replace the Sigma. Looking at your Flickr, it appears you are using wide angle a lot, too.

I don't know how much you use the 18-55 or 50/1.8, but there are upgrade possibilities for those, too. And I normally would say "lenses before camera bodies", but you may want to look into a 70D, too, once they're available. Or a 7D. Higher frame rate for those panned shots. Also, at least in the 7D, lightning fast AF for action shooting (70D looks to be similar, but who knows).

EDIT: Someone suggested, and I agree, you might want to consider a quality Neutral Density filter. Some of the slower shutter speeds for those panned shots, you are already at ISO 100 and forced to use dangerously small apertures. On your 18MP camera, any aperture smaller than f7.1 starts to lose some fine detail to diffraction. Probably not noticeable at f8, and may be fine in all but the largest prints at f11... but at f16 an any smaller, you'll start to notice it more and more.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 30, 2013 13:05 as a reply to  @ amfoto1's post |  #17

The other possibilities for longer better glass (in zoom form) are the 100-400L or the 70-300L. The would focus faster and have better IQ than your 55-250.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jul 30, 2013 13:13 as a reply to  @ jimewall's post |  #18

Very nice Flickr account there. I would get the 70-300L for you are shooting. The faster aperture of the 2.8 is largely negated if you are shooting in good light and also use the motion blur with technique as good as yours. If you want to add a fast prime like a 135/2 L or 200/2.8 II to the 70-300L, you are still at about the cost of a 70-200/2.8 II.


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
Fester
Senior Member
814 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Texas, South of the border of Mexico
     
Jul 30, 2013 13:16 |  #19

get the 70-200 ii
You'll get better IQ and have better chances of shooting something worht buying
The 70-200 retains its value well too!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keedo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
355 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Chicago IL
     
Jul 30, 2013 15:51 |  #20

chrismarriott66 wrote in post #16165759 (external link)
Mate, the shots on your flickr are awesome... you obviously know how to use the gear you've got. One comment I would make though is that to drag the shutter you're shooting up to f22 sometimes, which will be one of the reasons your images aren't as sharp as they could be - I would consider investing in a decent ND filter before you dump all your money on the 70-200 mk2.

Don't get me wrong, the images from the 70-200 mk2 will almost certainly "pop" more than the 55-250, however, I'm really not sure you'll get £1750 (US equivalent obviously) more "pop". Also, as you're never shooting wide open, do you really need 2.8? The f4 IS is lovely and sharp and virtually half the price and weight. Just my two cents worth :)

Hmmm, I will start having to shoot at higher Fstop from now on, Thanks! The F4 seems to be highly recommended.

shootingdave wrote in post #16165837 (external link)
Dude you are good!

I would say get an ND filter and a CPL filter. Shooting a f/22 can give you diffraction issues causing softness.
I bought the 70-200 f/4 it's light which makes using it at the track all day a breeze! I bought mine second hand and got it for £350.

What you have is doing you well, maybe a longer prime like a 300m f/4 would be nice. I know it is what I am considering next.

I would get a CPL but it's pointless, when the lens focuses, it spins the whole front end, I would have no control over my filter.

bob_r wrote in post #16166579 (external link)
I looked at your Flickr site to see what type of shots you're taking now and a few things came to mind (BTW, you have some very nice shots on Flickr). You are currently using a crop camera and the 55-250 for most of your panning shots and when I checked the exif data, many were taken at the longer end of your 55-250mm. Won't you miss the 200-250mm range if you go with a 70-200 and if you do decide to go to full frame, won't losing the crop factor be even more of an issue?

I'd give some more thought to why you think FF would be advantageous for the type of shooting you're currently doing and also the focal range that would meet your needs before making any serious investments. BTW, judging by the apertures used on most of your panning shots, I don't see why you think an f/2.8 lens would be necessary.

I have thought about that, and I could just get an extender if needed. Because it's at a low fstop, i'd still have a decently low fstop ability.

jimewall wrote in post #16166968 (external link)
The other possibilities for longer better glass (in zoom form) are the 100-400L or the 70-300L. The would focus faster and have better IQ than your 55-250.

The 70-300 never crossed my mind odly, I feel like 100 would be too tight.

FEChariot wrote in post #16166992 (external link)
Very nice Flickr account there. I would get the 70-300L for you are shooting. The faster aperture of the 2.8 is largely negated if you are shooting in good light and also use the motion blur with technique as good as yours. If you want to add a fast prime like a 135/2 L or 200/2.8 II to the 70-300L, you are still at about the cost of a 70-200/2.8 II.

Hmm, I might have to get the 70-300. As well as a prime if needed.


6D -- Canon 24-105 -- 50mm f1.8 -- Canon 16-35 f/4 -- Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II -- Canon 85 1.8
Flickr (external link)FaceBook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jul 30, 2013 15:54 |  #21

Keedo wrote in post #16167472 (external link)
I would get a CPL but it's pointless, when the lens focuses, it spins the whole front end, I would have no control over my filter.

Its a pain on the 55-250, but you will not have to worry about the rotating barrel on any of these lenses you are looking at.


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
DocFrankenstein
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,324 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2004
Location: where the buffalo roam
     
Jul 30, 2013 15:56 |  #22

It depends if you're willing to carry it around. From your flickr it seems you're dragging the shutter and at f/8 and f/11 you might not see a difference.

You can always buy used and sell it later. I tried having a 70-200, but found out I never used it because it's too big and heavy. But I didn't shoot motorsports.


National Sarcasm Society. Like we need your support.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keedo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
355 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Chicago IL
     
Jul 30, 2013 16:01 |  #23

FEChariot wrote in post #16167483 (external link)
Its a pain on the 55-250, but you will not have to worry about the rotating barrel on any of these lenses you are looking at.

tell me about it haha

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16167491 (external link)
It depends if you're willing to carry it around. From your flickr it seems you're dragging the shutter and at f/8 and f/11 you might not see a difference.

You can always buy used and sell it later. I tried having a 70-200, but found out I never used it because it's too big and heavy. But I didn't shoot motorsports.

The size and weight will not bother me, knowing what I am carrying will justify it.


6D -- Canon 24-105 -- 50mm f1.8 -- Canon 16-35 f/4 -- Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II -- Canon 85 1.8
Flickr (external link)FaceBook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,452 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 663
Joined Aug 2006
Location: West Tennessee, USA
     
Jul 30, 2013 16:28 |  #24

Keedo wrote in post #16167472 (external link)
I have thought about that, and I could just get an extender if needed. Because it's at a low fstop, i'd still have a decently low fstop ability.

IMHO, planning on buying a new lens that is too short and planning on buying an extender to fix the problem is not a wise choice. An extender can be added for occasional shots in certain situations, but it shouldn't be needed under your normal shooting conditions. I think you'd be much happier if you bought the right lens for the job and I don't believe the 70-200 is the right lens for your situation, especially if you're considering moving to FF.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SnapshotRN
Mostly Lurking
Avatar
16 posts
Joined Jul 2013
     
Jul 31, 2013 23:11 |  #25

Normally I do NOT like hedging bets on "rumors" for ANY equipment; however...

There is strong sentiment that Sigma will release a 135mm 1.8 prime lens.

If you follow their current business model, there is ZERO chance they are doing this as a "cheap alternative". That would not make any sense, since Canon's 135L is only $1,000 brand new.

The logical assumption is, they fully intend the lens to "beat" the 135L. The price will probably be lower than $1,000, if they intend to steal market share too.

I am in the same position as you, as I am looking into telephoto primes. Just a thought. Otherwise... one more vote for the 70-200 2.8 mkii.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Aug 02, 2013 09:49 |  #26

FEChariot wrote in post #16166992 (external link)
Very nice Flickr account there. I would get the 70-300L for you are shooting. The faster aperture of the 2.8 is largely negated if you are shooting in good light and also use the motion blur with technique as good as yours. If you want to add a fast prime like a 135/2 L or 200/2.8 II to the 70-300L, you are still at about the cost of a 70-200/2.8 II.

This. The 70-300L is an outstanding lens in every respect. If I could bring myself to sell my 70-200 f4 IS, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. And if I were starting from scratch today, I'd buy the 70-300L instead of one of the 70-200s.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keedo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
355 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Chicago IL
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:07 |  #27

What about the First Gen 70-200? http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …f_2_8L_USM_Auto​focus.html (external link)


6D -- Canon 24-105 -- 50mm f1.8 -- Canon 16-35 f/4 -- Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II -- Canon 85 1.8
Flickr (external link)FaceBook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luta13
Member
Avatar
185 posts
Joined Mar 2013
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:15 |  #28

Beat me to it. That is an excellent, excellent lens and can be shot at 2.8 with great results. IQ is sharper than IS version I and on par with IS II version. For shooting motion and sports the Image Stabilization is of little use for you anyway. Get the 70-200 non IS for half the money if you are certain to be shooting events with movement. Its a tad bit smaller/lighter too.


- Mike -
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/luta_foto/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:28 as a reply to  @ Luta13's post |  #29

you could get a tamron 70-200 f2.8 vc and a 15-85 both for under what it would cost your for the canon 70-200 mk2. Not saying don't go for the canon but being able to upgrade both your standard zoom and your short tele by quite a large margin, would be nice all for less than just the canon mk2.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
Aug 04, 2013 16:33 as a reply to  @ mine1's post |  #30

there are many great auto shots on the 15-85mm thread. https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=76014​0&page=222


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

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

3,762 views & 0 likes for this thread
To Get L or Not?
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 cery333
944 guests, 338 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.