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 23 May 2009 (Saturday) 07:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Thinking about buying a telephoto lens.

 
toxic
Goldmember
3,498 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2008
Location: California
     
May 31, 2009 14:45 |  #16

For the price of an f/4 IS, you can get the f/4 and a 100/2 or 85/1.8, so you might as well go that route if f/4 works for you outdoors.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
May 31, 2009 15:15 |  #17

bigland wrote in post #8023198 (external link)
I'm sorry, I really don't think I am going to rethink my strategy based on ONE person's opinion.

no problem - it's your money, spend it wisely!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,512 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
May 31, 2009 20:11 |  #18

StageOne wrote in post #7974108 (external link)
If you really like the 85, but want a little more reach, look at its twin the 100 f2.

I agree with StageOne. If you think the 85mm might be short and the 135mm long, why not the 100mm 2.0?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MikeMcL
Goldmember
Avatar
1,411 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Dayton Ohio
     
Jun 01, 2009 16:06 |  #19

if you cant get it at 2.8IS you arent going to be able to get it with f/4 or f/4IS.

I thought you wanted to solve that problem, not just "get a new lens"

You can shoot at 2.8 and ISO 1600 and recover 2 stops in raw... personally, i have done this alot and it works great.

IS is not going to help you get a faster shutter speed. if it's dark, it's dark.

If that is the case, just get the 100 f/2. f/2 is not noticeably faster than 2.8 in most situations.

Good luck with your choice.

bigland wrote in post #8023198 (external link)
I'm sorry, I really don't think I am going to rethink my strategy based on ONE person's opinion.

MikeMcl: I am not going to automatically replace the 70-200 in the fall. I will only consider replacing if I find I need the IS in my regular, daily shooting. I am going to consider augmenting my lens lineup with a 85 f/1.8 or 135 f/2. I really don't think the 70-200 f/2.8 would be my answer because I need to set my ISO at 3200 with an aperture of 2.8 to have any chance of freezing the action. I want to get away from shooting at ISO 3200.


Sumodog: Thanks for the advice on shooting the BBall. Which focal length did you find most useful when shooting courtside?


350d, 5d, 28-70L, 70-200L, 430EX,
50 1.8, 85 1.8 - full alienbees studio set.

MikeMcLane.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bigland
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
405 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: 53°18' N 60°25' W
     
Jun 01, 2009 16:26 |  #20

MikeMcL wrote in post #8030141 (external link)
if you cant get it at 2.8IS you arent going to be able to get it with f/4 or f/4IS.

I thought you wanted to solve that problem, not just "get a new lens"

You can shoot at 2.8 and ISO 1600 and recover 2 stops in raw... personally, i have done this alot and it works great.

IS is not going to help you get a faster shutter speed. if it's dark, it's dark.

If that is the case, just get the 100 f/2. f/2 is not noticeably faster than 2.8 in most situations.

Good luck with your choice.

I know the f/4 isn't going to be much good for my in a gymnasium - and I'm okay with that.

If you read my first post, the problem I wanted to solve was to extend my focal range. So I guess I fail to see why I am just "getting a new lens". As stated in my opening post, I do the majority of my shooting outside in good light. It is only occasionally that I shoot in the dimly lit gymnasium.

If, in the fall, I am not satisfied with my 17-55 IS in the gym, then I will buy the 85 f/1.8. If I do that, I will still have spend substantially less than if I purchased the 70-200 f/2.8 IS.

I have to disagree with you that f/2.0 is not noticeably faster than f/2.8 in most situations. But that argument, I could say that f/2.8 is not noticeably faster than f/4 in most situations - which as my 70-200 f/4 (which I have now btw) clearly shows me in dim situations.


5DII | 35 f/1.4L | 85 f/1.8 | 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
p32shooter
Senior Member
713 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2007
     
Jun 01, 2009 18:12 |  #21

if the f4 works, look at sigma 100-300


wants for Ls :D , now have 400do;500f4is,600f4 :cool::cool: off to birding and airshows:):):)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cyclop
Cream of the Crop
6,899 posts
Joined Jun 2007
     
Jun 02, 2009 05:38 |  #22

Personally, I would save your hard-earned money and pursue purchase of the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens.


Canon 50D w/grip, Canon 7D, Mark II w/grip, Tokina UWA 11-16 2.8, Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS, Canon 300 4 L IS, Canon 400 5.6 L, Canon 100 "macro" 2.8, Canon 60 "macro" 2.8, Canon Extender 1.4xII, Gitzo 3531S tripod w/Markins M20 ballhead, Gitzo GT2531EX tripod, Bogen-Manfrotto 681B monopod w/3232 head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bigland
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
405 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: 53°18' N 60°25' W
     
Jun 02, 2009 08:38 |  #23

Cyclop wrote in post #8033869 (external link)
Personally, I would save your hard-earned money and pursue purchase of the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens.

At some point, I may have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. But right now, that is more $$ than I can afford. I purchased the 70-200 f/4 used, so when I do have the funds for the 2.8 IS, I can sell the f/4 for close to what I paid for it. I now have a 70-200 to use until the day comes that I get a 2.8 IS.

On a side not, I had forgotten how bad camera shake can be until I zoomed the 70-200 into 200mm. The focus point looked like it could on Dancing with the Stars! :)


5DII | 35 f/1.4L | 85 f/1.8 | 430EX II

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

2,269 views & 0 likes for this thread
Thinking about buying a telephoto lens.
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 64Ivy
1039 guests, 355 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.