The lousy L bug, halp!?

For weeks and weeks after finally settling down with my gear and getting out into the photography world. I still come here into this sub section of the forum and still looking at the 70-200 for some unknown reason. What should I do? I know people have told me my gear is fine enough, but I still can't get over the images I see people use the 70-200 in the automotive world...

----> 70-200 f4 IS is the culprit..

Sigma 30mm 1.4
Sigma 50mm 1.4
Sigma 85mm 1.4
Sigma 10-20mm 4-5.6 wide angle
Sigma 17-70 OS
Tamron 70-300 VC 4-5.6
Tokina 10-17mm 4-5.6 fisheye
Rokinon 8mm 3.5 fisheye

I know my range is a bit overlapping but I can't seem to find a good enough reason to part any of my current lenses. D:<

Sorry for the rant..

"Automotive world" - how so? Races? If races, depending on the series, I find 200mm a little short.

Before you commit to additional expense - why not rent the 70-200mm first ?

If it suits then by all means go-ahead and buy it!
Otherwise, you have only spent a little money on 'research'.

Your current Tamron 70-300 is already covering this focal range - so I guess that the image quality that you desire is lacking - you can always unload this later on.

JonK wrote in post #13338314
"Automotive world" - how so? Races? If races, depending on the series, I find 200mm a little short.

Car shows, drift events, dragging, and just typical magazine type shoots. I do a lot of automotive photography for websites. Is the range too short and I should go past that?

Cham_001 wrote in post #13338389
Before you commit to additional expense - why not rent the 70-200mm first ?

If it suits then by all means go-ahead and buy it!
Otherwise, you have only spent a little money on 'research'.

Your current Tamron 70-300 is already covering this focal range - so I guess that the image quality that you desire is lacking - you can always unload this later on.

I plan to sell the 70-300 vc if the 70-200 is the one, I mean I know the 70-300 vc has been compared to the 70-200's IQ but it still gets beaten everytime.

The 70-200 has better IQ, build, and faster AF than your tamron, however, your tamron has VC, and an extra 100mm on the long end. You can, however, add a 1.4x TC and still have better IQ than the tamron though.

I went with the 70-200 when I was upgrading from my 55-250 because I wanted something with faster focus, constant aperture, and great IQ. I had considered the tamron, but figured that the small gain in IQ and slightly bigger gain in focus speed was not worth it. But then you already have the 70-300.

What is the 70-300 not giving you?

Sirrith wrote in post #13338430
The 70-200 has better IQ, build, and faster AF than your tamron, however, your tamron has VC, and an extra 100mm on the long end. You can, however, add a 1.4x TC and still have better IQ than the tamron though.

I went with the 70-200 when I was upgrading from my 55-250 because I wanted something with faster focus, constant aperture, and great IQ. I had considered the tamron, but figured that the small gain in IQ and slightly bigger gain in focus speed was not worth it. But then you already have the 70-300.

What is the 70-300 not giving you?

I'm not sure the 100mm is gonna be a lost to me or not, I usually try to just get closer in the end. I was looking at the 70-200 f4 IS, so losing the vc wouldn't be the issue here. I'm not sure what to do. :S

It's not that the 70-300 isn't giving me anything I don't need its just these comparison shots of the two are really making me think twice. I can't really explain why I keep coming back and looking at the threads of it....for some reason maybe it was a regret or thought that still lingers in my head that I bought the 70-300 vc to replace the 70-200...

You may roll your eyes, but if you like all your lenses, then don't sell any of them and find another way to get the 70-200. Then if you find that you don't use your 70-300 then you can get rid of it.

It may feel impossible, but if you really want if bad enough, I bet you can find a way to get it.

Do remember that:
angle of view
composition
lighting
in-camera settings
.... all play a part when assessing 'similar' pics.
Unless you 'test-shoot' both lenses side-by-side, you will always end up questioning your purchase(s).

zerovision wrote in post #13338518
You may roll your eyes, but if you like all your lenses, then don't sell any of them and find another way to get the 70-200. Then if you find that you don't use your 70-300 then you can get rid of it.

It may feel impossible, but if you really want if bad enough, I bet you can find a way to get it.

yeah..that's exactly how I feel right now too. :S

However..

Cham_001 wrote in post #13338527
Do remember that:
angle of view
composition
lighting
in-camera settings
.... all play a part when assessing 'similar' pics.
Unless you 'test-shoot' both lenses side-by-side, you will always end up questioning your purchase(s).

Never thought of it that way. But I mean when these two are compared against each other the 70-200 beats it by far.

*******

You guys don't think my range is overlapping? I'm thinking of getting rid of the Sigma 50 1.4, the Tamron 70-300 vc, and the Tokina fisheye (I have the Rokinon 8mm fisheye that I forgot to list). I mean I thought about it this way as well, I only have one camera body, why do I need so many lenses? I think the Sigma 30/85 is a great combo to keep, and the Sigma 50 always stays in the bag for the most part. I don't usually touch the Tamron unless I know for sure it's a drag/drift event but ..meh.

I should quit looking at lenses. lol

You don't want the 70-200 f/4L IS

You want the 70-200 f/2.8L IS

Numenorean wrote in post #13338613
You don't want the 70-200 f/4L IS

You want the 70-200 f/2.8L IS

I'm going to beat you with a broom. xD

Vixen89 wrote in post #13338636
I'm going to beat you with a broom. xD

He's got a point. If you photo drifting a lot of the events are under stadium lights. even 2.8 is "slow" for that. I have a 70-200/2.8 II and use it for motorsports work. I put the 70-200 on my 5DII and my 400 on my 7D. It depends on the event but a car coming out of the apex of a turn from far away looks KILLER compared to a 100mm shot.

Well the only events I go to are outdoor. I don't like indoor stadium stuff, drives me nuts about how I didn't bring a prime for low light or something.

either stop looking at comparison threads and just shoot with what you have until it limits you...or rent it...see for yourself if it's all it's cracked up to be for you...then decide how to move forward by either keeping what you have, or getting the lens

The stores here only have the f/2.8 version not the f/4 to rent.