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 02 Sep 2014 (Tuesday) 11:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Liking less my 24-70mm f2.8 II and 70-200mm f2.8 IS II

 
bobbyz
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
19,429 posts
Likes: 1581
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Sep 04, 2014 11:32 |  #31

^^ See it all depends. I am not saying zooms are bad. I have been mainly a zoom guy. I started with dSLR with 100-400L being my first lens. Then I got 400mm f5.6 and had both for a while. Both had their plus and minus and I liked them both. Then I moved to 500mm f4 IS and 300mm f2.8 IS combo. Both great at what they do. Always wished I had zoom for sports and picked sigma 120-300mm f2.8 non OS but it was bad bad compared to canon prime. Prime gave me fewer shots but much better. I am looking at the newer sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS sports as it has quite good reviews and provides flexibility compared to primes as I can cover things with 1 camera/lens rather than having 300/400mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 on another body.

But for regular stuff (kids, family) I see f1.4/f2 primes give me better image quality. It could be just the pop from wider apertures. Inside I find f2.8 gets slower even with higher ISO bodies and I rather shoot wider aperture and lower ISO to remove the clutter and focus more on the subject.

Since I picked up Fuji XT1, I may sell the zooms to pay for it and some other toys. I don't know. 70-200mm f2.8 would be handy for kids sports/events.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,085 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2772
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 04, 2014 12:01 |  #32

bobbyz wrote in post #17135363 (external link)
^^ See it all depends. I am not saying zooms are bad. I have been mainly a zoom guy. I started with dSLR with 100-400L being my first lens. Then I got 400mm f5.6 and had both for a while. Both had their plus and minus and I liked them both. Then I moved to 500mm f4 IS and 300mm f2.8 IS combo. Both great at what they do. Always wished I had zoom for sports and picked sigma 120-300mm f2.8 non OS but it was bad bad compared to canon prime. Prime gave me fewer shots but much better. I am looking at the newer sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS sports as it has quite good reviews and provides flexibility compared to primes as I can cover things with 1 camera/lens rather than having 300/400mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 on another body.

But for regular stuff (kids, family) I see f1.4/f2 primes give me better image quality. It could be just the pop from wider apertures. Inside I find f2.8 gets slower even with higher ISO bodies and I rather shoot wider aperture and lower ISO to remove the clutter and focus more on the subject.

Since I picked up Fuji XT1, I may sell the zooms to pay for it and some other toys. I don't know. 70-200mm f2.8 would be handy for kids sports/events.

Been there done that. The non OS model 120-300 is not up to snuff with the newer sport model and OS model. I tested my OS model to my 300 2.8 IS v1 and the difference was neglible. In lightroom it took a bump on the canon in contrast to a +10 and blacks to a -12 and sharpness up from the standard 25 to a 35 to match the canon at 25. Then it was so close it was impossible to tell at 1:1 and at 50% no way you could see a difference.

You say the 70-200 would be good for sports/events but I say the 120-300 is better. Only difference is the weight but I carry mine and handhold it no problems through 2hrs worth of football games.

And the rest.... indoor stuff, kids stuff, my stuff... ya primes. I'm already figuring this out and adjusting my kit to meet those needs.

One thing I'm trying now is a slower F4 zoom setup for when I'm vacationing paired with one fast prime. See how I like that.

Ultimately this is my kit or will be in the near future:

5D3 ultimate body
6D vacation body
14 - my wide fun lens, astro stuff (when vacationing) car stuff
24 - indoor wide lens (or i may keep 35, will be one or the other for me)
50 - birthday party lens portrait kid indoor stuff
85 - longer birthday party portrait kit indoor stuff
135 - gymnastics, dance on stage where indoors lower light need all the shutter I can get
8-15 - ok... this is just my fun lens is all.
16-35 F4 IS - vacationing general walk around
70-200 F4 IS - vacationing general walk around
120-300 - sports, cheer, dance recitals, choir events, graduations, distance items

I really want to swap the 35/85/135 for a 24/50/135 but there is no way I can get rid of the 85. it's that awesome.

But seriously I've been in your shoes in a similiar way... I had both 24-70/70-200 tamron VC models and I used them alot when I only had a 35 and that was my only 3 lenses.

It's all your fault... you sold me the 85 and when I got it... never touched the 70-200 and then I started to use the 35 more also and now never touch the 24-70.

Same boat... different shoes.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gocolts
Goldmember
1,246 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2010
     
Sep 04, 2014 12:07 |  #33

I went through this with my 70-200 MKII. Still needed a 70-200 2.8 sometimes...but not enough to justify such an expensive lens. Went with a used Tamron 70-200 VC, and with the price difference picked up a 135L.

Full disclosure- I also have an 85L v1. Between the 85L and 135L I simply don't need the zoom very often. For racetracks I prefer the 70-300L.

As for the 24-70II, I know it's a very popular lens, but for me, a 50mm prime and 24-105L are a better combo for vacation/portrait needs. YMMV of course depending on what you plan to do with the lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,897 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5936
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 04, 2014 13:22 |  #34

gocolts wrote in post #17135419 (external link)
I went through this with my 70-200 MKII. Still needed a 70-200 2.8 sometimes...but not enough to justify such an expensive lens. Went with a used Tamron 70-200 VC, and with the price difference picked up a 135L.

Full disclosure- I also have an 85L v1. Between the 85L and 135L I simply don't need the zoom very often. For racetracks I prefer the 70-300L.

As for the 24-70II, I know it's a very popular lens, but for me, a 50mm prime and 24-105L are a better combo for vacation/portrait needs. YMMV of course depending on what you plan to do with the lens.

that's the thing with these damn lenses, too many scenarios where one has the advantage over the others. Sometimes I need the 70-200F2.8, a lot of times, I'de rather 70-200F4. That damn 135F2... I'm looking to buy another more compact version for the sony A7r............

I hardly ever "need" the F2.8 of the 24-200 lenses, but I would feel so naked without them.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carpenter
Goldmember
2,620 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 447
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Green Bay, WI
     
Sep 04, 2014 14:10 |  #35

bobbyz wrote in post #17135363 (external link)
^^ See it all depends. I am not saying zooms are bad. I have been mainly a zoom guy. I started with dSLR with 100-400L being my first lens. Then I got 400mm f5.6 and had both for a while. Both had their plus and minus and I liked them both. Then I moved to 500mm f4 IS and 300mm f2.8 IS combo. Both great at what they do. Always wished I had zoom for sports and picked sigma 120-300mm f2.8 non OS but it was bad bad compared to canon prime. Prime gave me fewer shots but much better. I am looking at the newer sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS sports as it has quite good reviews and provides flexibility compared to primes as I can cover things with 1 camera/lens rather than having 300/400mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 on another body.

But for regular stuff (kids, family) I see f1.4/f2 primes give me better image quality. It could be just the pop from wider apertures. Inside I find f2.8 gets slower even with higher ISO bodies and I rather shoot wider aperture and lower ISO to remove the clutter and focus more on the subject.

Since I picked up Fuji XT1, I may sell the zooms to pay for it and some other toys. I don't know. 70-200mm f2.8 would be handy for kids sports/events.


You let me know if you sell that 70-200.. Ready to buy :)


5D Mk IV | 24-105L | 85 1.8 | 70-200L 2.8 IS MkII | 100-400L MkII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
the ­ flying ­ moose
Goldmember
1,639 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Dec 2006
     
Sep 04, 2014 22:01 |  #36

bobbyz wrote in post #17135363 (external link)
I am looking at the newer sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS sports as it has quite good reviews and provides flexibility compared to primes as I can cover things with 1 camera/lens rather than having 300/400mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 on another body.

Please post up a review or something if you pick one up. I was going to buy the regular 120-300 and was not impressed on my in store trial.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Avo
Mostly Lurking
11 posts
Joined Aug 2014
     
Sep 05, 2014 04:39 |  #37

I am opposite. Had both the 85L and 70-200ii for a while. At first preferred the 85L for the unique look but it soon get tiresome and the AF and CA started to bother me. Also the relatively far focusing distance means I could not get tight headshots with it. Finally I sold it.

Although heavy and it has a smaller aperture, the 70-200ii has taken some of my very best shots due to its great AF, sharpness, versatile range and the compressed perspective.


5D Mark III, Sony A7R
EF24-70 f/2.8 II, EF70-200 f/2.8 IS II, Sigma 35 f/1.4
SEL35F28, SEL55F18

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MattD
Senior Member
Avatar
944 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Norwich UK
     
Sep 05, 2014 04:48 |  #38

70-200mmf 2.8 IS II was released, I bought it and fell in love and sold my 135L

I feel your pain.

Im constantly annoyed with both lenses because I don't know which to keep. And at the same time I'm afraid to sell one if i regret it.


Flickr (external link).
500PX (external link)
Twitter (external link)
Tumblr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,085 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2772
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 05, 2014 08:33 |  #39

the flying moose wrote in post #17136392 (external link)
Please post up a review or something if you pick one up. I was going to buy the regular 120-300 and was not impressed on my in store trial.

If you would like I can send you samples of the 120-300 OS non sport @ 300mm 2.8 vs the canon 300 2.8L IS v1 at 2.8 so you can see the difference.

It was an easy choice for me to sell my 3500 dollar canon and move to the 2,000 dollar sigma. Haven't looked back since.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,897 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5936
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 05, 2014 08:39 |  #40

Avo wrote in post #17136743 (external link)
I am opposite. Had both the 85L and 70-200ii for a while. At first preferred the 85L for the unique look but it soon get tiresome and the AF and CA started to bother me. Also the relatively far focusing distance means I could not get tight headshots with it. Finally I sold it.

Although heavy and it has a smaller aperture, the 70-200ii has taken some of my very best shots due to its great AF, sharpness, versatile range and the compressed perspective.

it's really a fantastic lens, and I agree with this sentiment, but it's such a chore to drag it along, that it feels like work. I brought an old 135mm F2.8 to legoland the other week. Sure, the IQ isnt as good, nor the flexibility, but imagine carrying 1.5 kilo around for the whole day, not to mention the sheer size, vs a scant 300 grams......


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,085 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2772
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 05, 2014 09:09 |  #41

Charlie wrote in post #17137014 (external link)
it's really a fantastic lens, and I agree with this sentiment, but it's such a chore to drag it along, that it feels like work. I brought an old 135mm F2.8 to legoland the other week. Sure, the IQ isnt as good, nor the flexibility, but imagine carrying 1.5 kilo around for the whole day, not to mention the sheer size, vs a scant 300 grams......

I've carried my 120-300 on vacation at some zoo's for hours. Do that and then the 70-200 2.8 feels light :D

my new 70-200 F4 IS feels like a toy. I think my sigma 85 is heavier lol


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,897 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5936
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 05, 2014 09:58 |  #42

Talley wrote in post #17137063 (external link)
I've carried my 120-300 on vacation at some zoo's for hours. Do that and then the 70-200 2.8 feels light :D

my new 70-200 F4 IS feels like a toy. I think my sigma 85 is heavier lol

well, your youngest still has a stroller right? that's like cheating for photogs ;)

The only bag I had was my camera bag, no strollers, no one watching my stuff, and going on all the rides. It's bad enough just walking through the amusement park the whole day empty handed. Toss in some gear....


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,102 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 435
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Sep 05, 2014 10:44 as a reply to  @ Charlie's post |  #43

you do have a history of being fickle and making drastic changes to your gear line-up Bobby :D.


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
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,085 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2772
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 05, 2014 10:58 |  #44

Charlie wrote in post #17137154 (external link)
well, your youngest still has a stroller right? that's like cheating for photogs ;)

The only bag I had was my camera bag, no strollers, no one watching my stuff, and going on all the rides. It's bad enough just walking through the amusement park the whole day empty handed. Toss in some gear....

I hear ya it's a pita.

but yes and no. stroller was a chico umbrella and no place for the camera bag to go. I use a Street Walker Pro bag and it has thick shoulder straps so it makes it a tad comfy.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Sep 05, 2014 11:11 |  #45

A few years ago, I had my camera lens hidden at the bottom compartment of my stroller. I wandered off 20 feet to take some photos of my kid. Well, when I turned around, the stroller was stolen. Never found the stroller nor my pair of camera lens.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

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

8,237 views & 0 likes for this thread
Liking less my 24-70mm f2.8 II and 70-200mm f2.8 IS II
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 Car147
1669 guests, 200 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.