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 28 Jul 2014 (Monday) 07:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Get rid of the 70-200?

 
Closed ­ 123
Senior Member
512 posts
Likes: 44
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 28, 2014 07:55 |  #1
bannedPermanently

Hey all,

I'm debating to get rid of my 70-200 4L and use the money to buy something else.

I don't seem to use lens at all and when I do, f/4 is just to slow to get any good shots when it's not very sunny outside. My 85 1.8 seems to be tele enough for me. But I do feel the we all need to have a telezoom lens... :|

I'm also looking to replace my Sigma 17-50 2.8 for something sharper, any suggestions? Selling the 70-200 gives me a fairly large budget.


Canon EOS 80D
Canon 10-18mm STM | Canon 24-70mm f/4 | Canon 50mm STM
Canon Speedlite 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
328iGuy
Goldmember
Avatar
3,617 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 693
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Ottawa | Ontario
     
Jul 28, 2014 08:05 |  #2

Well it all depends on what you shoot mostly, and outdoors the F4 should not be any issues whatsoever even on a cloudy day, plenty of light.

You state selling it will give you a large budget, however it will give you no more than around $500, which in the lens world is quite minuscule to be honest. :)

I guess its a question you need to answer yourself, as to your shooting style.


EOS R5 | EOS R6 | EF 8-15L | RF 15-35L 2.8 | RF 24-70L 2.8 | RF 85L 1.2 | RF 70-200L 2.8 | RF 100-500L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Closed ­ 123
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
512 posts
Likes: 44
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 28, 2014 08:12 |  #3
bannedPermanently

Oh I'm sorry, I meant to say that selling the 70-200 would ADD to my current budget. I mostly shoot portraits, general walk around pictures and some events and parties.


Canon EOS 80D
Canon 10-18mm STM | Canon 24-70mm f/4 | Canon 50mm STM
Canon Speedlite 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pictureman62
Senior Member
Avatar
439 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Apr 2011
Location: East Tenn
     
Jul 28, 2014 08:19 |  #4

Robin,
Seems like you have a good range to start 17-50 / 85 / 70-200. If your wanting to replace the 70-200, I replaced my 70-200 2.8 with the 200 2.8 L . Since most of the time I used the 70-200 at the far end of 200, it was a logical replacement for me. The 70-200 was just to heavy for me on long shoots.
The 200 2.8 L is a great lens, fast, great focus, cheaper ( got mine for $700 used) and lighter. All a plus for me. Just my 2 cents.


Capture today, for everyone to enjoy tomorrow!:D
5D mkiii / 6D / 7D / (4) 600ex-rt, / Canon 135 F2 L /Canon 200 2.8L / Canon 24-105 4L / Canon 24-70 2.8 L / Canon 70-200 4 L / Canon 85 1.8 /Canon 50 1.8 STM / Canon ef-s 17-55 2.8 and plenty of smiles!:D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Out buying Wheaties
Avatar
6,755 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 428
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Jul 28, 2014 10:37 as a reply to  @ pictureman62's post |  #5

Yes, I do need to have tele from time to time and my 70_200 F4 L is just what I need.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
borismach
Mostly Lurking
Avatar
19 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jul 28, 2014 10:45 |  #6

Agree to replace it with 200/2.8L first...when you talking about 17-50 replacement, I can think of 17-40/4L or 16-35/2.8L...for me I enjoy my 17-40/4L very much...


borismach
Canon 5D3, 6D, 17-40/4L, 24/1.4L, 50/1.2L, 50/1.4, 135/2L, 300/4L, EF 1.4X III

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Closed ­ 123
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
512 posts
Likes: 44
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 28, 2014 11:23 |  #7
bannedPermanently

Ah the 200 2.8 sounds like a great option, hadn't thought of that.

I once owned the 17-40, but I felt the range fell short at the telephoto end. Besides I had a bad copy with decentered lens elements. :(

I'm considering the Canon 24-105 and adding a Canon 10-18 IS STM.


Canon EOS 80D
Canon 10-18mm STM | Canon 24-70mm f/4 | Canon 50mm STM
Canon Speedlite 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Jul 28, 2014 11:51 |  #8

If the 70-200 doesn't work for you, by all means feel free to sell it off and put the money toward something else.

Personally 70-200 is one of my most used lenses.... so much so that I have two - 70-200/4 IS and 70-200/2.8 IS "Mark I". I don't understand the limitations you are finding with your lens... I use the f4 lens all the time in covered equestrian arenas, which are considerably darker than overcast days, and f4 is no problem at all. I just bump up my ISO to compensate.

70-200/4 IS lens at f/4 and 135mm, 7D at ISO 800, 1/640 shutter speed, handheld, available light.

IMAGE: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8261/8637243887_ba950d8f56_z.jpg

Within the last month, I've shot 12,000 images, many of which were with that lens.

But I'm not you and you're not me, so your needs and wants are bound to be different.

However, considering the limitations you find with the 70-200 f/4 lens now, I sure wouldn't go adding another f/4 lens like the 24-105. It would be heavily redundant with your other lenses, anyway.

You might want to check out the 135/2L, instead, if you need more telephoto reach than your 85mm offers.

IMO, the 135/2 is a "dream lens" on full frame. But it's also excellent on a crop camera such as your 60D (or my 50D in this case)... Here stopped down to f8 for depth of field:

IMAGE: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2654/3834879058_e23e7cd88e_o.jpg

Or used with a larger aperture to give a stronger background blur, here relatively close and at f4 (on 7D)...

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5068/5634060556_f7091c8205_z.jpg

And it's quite fast focusing, fully capable of sports/wildlife and other action photography (f5 on 7D)...

IMAGE: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8211/8346995090_7f2d39c021_z.jpg

The 135/2L also works very well with a quality 1.4X teleconverter, for a 189mm f2.8, if even more reach is needed.

If the 135/2L is "too much" in any way, an alternative is the EF 100/2.0 (not the macro lens, though that's yet another option, just slower focusing and f2.8 instead of f2.0).

The 10-18mm (or an EF-S 10-22mm) makes a lot of sense to add to your kit, if you'll find uses for a wide angle lens.

Most think the Sigma 17-50/2.8 is a pretty decent lens. I haven't used it. But if you want something better, one of the very best in this range is the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM. An alternative that goes a bit wider (in case you don't get one of the ultrawides that go to 10mm) is the EF-S 15-85 IS USM. This also has superb image quality and an excellent range of focal lengths for a walk-around lens, but since it's an f3.5-5.6 lens might be best if you have two or three fast primes, too.

If you shoot a lot of low light/available light, you also might want to consider some other fairly fast primes such as the 50/1.4 and 28/1.8. These are smaller and less intrusive than many of the zooms, too, which can be nice for candid shots & street photography.

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
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 28, 2014 11:57 as a reply to  @ amfoto1's post |  #9

/\ This!


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
quadwing
Goldmember
Avatar
1,029 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 31
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Las Vegas, NV
     
Jul 28, 2014 11:59 |  #10

Yes, you should get rid of it.

And give it to me. For free.

Seriously though, I'd keep the 70-200mm for your portraits. Buuut, if you really want to get rid of it, get rid of it, and get an 85mm f/1.8--but the 70-200 is seriously much more flexible.

Maybe a 24-70?


Camera gear: Canon 5D Mark IV | Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L II | Lights: Elinchrom Ranger RX Speed AS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,583 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6539
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 28, 2014 12:01 |  #11

you already have the 17-40 ranged covered with a faster arguably better solution. The 24-105 does nothing you cant already do.

the sigma 17-50 > canon 17-40L. Faster and arguably sharper: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=2 (external link)

about as sharp as the 24-105 as well: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=2​&APIComp=2 (external link)

if the 85 is long enough for you, then your problem is solved. Just sell off the 70-200 and pocket that change.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scorpio_e
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,402 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Pa
     
Jul 28, 2014 12:02 |  #12

You could get the 200 2.8 prime.


www.steelcityphotograp​hy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Paulstw
Senior Member
827 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2012
     
Jul 28, 2014 13:01 |  #13

I got rid of my 70-200 2.8 mkII and it was thee single worst thing I ever done. I did follow through with a air biscuit once as a child, but getting rid of that lens was still worse.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kachadurian
Member
128 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2014
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
     
Jul 28, 2014 19:13 |  #14

RobinSchouten wrote in post #17061066 (external link)
Hey all,

I'm debating to get rid of my 70-200 4L and use the money to buy something else.

I don't seem to use lens at all and when I do, f/4 is just to slow to get any good shots when it's not very sunny outside. My 85 1.8 seems to be tele enough for me. But I do feel the we all need to have a telezoom lens... :|

I'm also looking to replace my Sigma 17-50 2.8 for something sharper, any suggestions? Selling the 70-200 gives me a fairly large budget.

You are doing something else wrong if you can't get any good shots at f4 except in very bright light. I'd love to see examples of photos that went wrong because the lens was too slow. What are you shooting?

Tom


www.kachadurian.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SueGirl
Member
46 posts
Joined Jul 2014
     
Jul 28, 2014 19:36 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban
SPAM PUT AWAY
This post is marked as spam.
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,516 views & 0 likes for this thread
Get rid of the 70-200?
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 BirdDog80
823 guests, 208 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.