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 09 Apr 2013 (Tuesday) 12:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 4Lor 2.8L

 
mike_311
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 560
Joined Mar 2011
     
Apr 09, 2013 12:10 |  #1

i'm thinking about selling my 85mm and getting a 70-200 4L or 2.8L

now i know the 2.8L is going to be the obvious choice of many, but will the 4L suffice? i use it mainly outdoors or indoors with studio lighting, so is the 2.8 for me is really only a requirement for DOF.

i'm not sure how much image quality improvement i'll get over the 85mm but im looking for more reach and and no drop in quality.


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
30,210 posts
Gallery: 277 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 8293
Joined Dec 2006
     
Apr 09, 2013 12:16 |  #2

How do you define quality? Your prime will be as sharp or sharper than a much more expensive zoom. I found the 70-200 f4 IS to be a great lens. Plenty sharp and with IS which is essential for a lens of this length in my opinion.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_311
THREAD ­ STARTER
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 560
Joined Mar 2011
     
Apr 09, 2013 12:22 |  #3

it needs to be sharp, and i know i wont get sharper. right now the 85 is my longest lens, and i need more length on occasion and sometimes i just cant move to the spot i need to be.

i know a 70-200 is in my future, but im not sure if i need to go all into the 2.8 or if he 4L will work for now.

i mainly shoot outdoors when light inst really an issue and im usually stopped down to the f4 or more anyway, just not sure if i will miss the ability to go shallow or if its plenty sharp wide open.


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phantelope
Goldmember
Avatar
1,889 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 40
Joined Sep 2008
Location: NorCal
     
Apr 09, 2013 12:31 |  #4

when I was in the same boat I went for the f4 and could not be happier. Sure, sometimes 2.8 would be nice, but that's pretty rare. I don't shoot much in low light and today's cameras can go pretty far in high ISO with no problem anyway. The f4 is a lot cheaper, a lot smaller, and a LOT lighter. Those were the points that made me decide. It's very sharp, a great lens I can carry around all day. I'd only get the 2.8 if I really needed the extra stops for low light. You can do some low DOF faking pretty easy in post if an image requires that. Not the same, but close enough for me. If you have the extra cash and don't intend to carry this thing all day, get the 2.8, otherwise I'd suggest the f4. and buy something else nice for the difference :-)

I've used it in the studio with no problem, usually shoot around f8 there anyway or switch to my 50/1.4 if I really need very low DOF.

Both are excellent lenses, I doubt you'd see much difference in anything but the DOF issue.


40D, 5D3, a bunch of lenses and other things :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Craign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,196 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 77
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Kentucky
     
Apr 09, 2013 12:37 |  #5

I realize this does not answer your question but it is something to consider if you want a great portrait lens if plenty of room is available: Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM

A lot of "ifs" in that statement. Images are stunning when shot with a 300mm f/4.0L IS lens.


Canon 7D Mark II w/Canon BG-E16 Battery Grip; Canon EOS 50D w/Canon Battery Grip; Canon SL1; Tokina 12mm - 24mm f/4 PRO DX II; Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS; Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS; Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS; Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM; Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS; Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM; Canon Extender EF 1.4x II; Canon Extender EF 2x II; Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash
Image Editing Okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BBoris77
Junior Member
21 posts
Joined Jul 2005
     
Apr 09, 2013 14:26 |  #6

mike_311 wrote in post #15808164 (external link)
i'm thinking about selling my 85mm and getting a 70-200 4L or 2.8L

now i know the 2.8L is going to be the obvious choice of many, but will the 4L suffice? i use it mainly outdoors or indoors with studio lighting, so is the 2.8 for me is really only a requirement for DOF.

i'm not sure how much image quality improvement i'll get over the 85mm but im looking for more reach and and no drop in quality.

Having never used 2.8L, I cannot really comment on it, but I absolutely love my 70-200 4L non-is. Image quality is fantastic compared to other zooms I have used in the past (18-135 STM, 28-105 mkII, 75-300mm). It is also very portable and extremely fast to focus.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Motor ­ On
Senior Member
Avatar
941 posts
Likes: 52
Joined Feb 2007
     
Apr 09, 2013 14:36 |  #7

f4L will be plenty sharp, outdoors daytime no problem, indoor studio light could go either way. You always can stop down the 2.8, but the price gap from a 70-200 f4L to a 70-200 2.8L ISII is enough to cover a 6D, 5DmkII, 7D, 60D, T4ix2, etc. I'd probably keep the 85, and get the f4, then use the 85 for situations you find lacking light but not wanting to pull out the flash.

While I've got a 70-200 f4L, I will admit it rarely sees use with an 85 1.8, 135 2, and 300 2.8 in the bag and I think the 135 could cover all need from any of the 70-200s and an 85 1.8 (the 1.2 earns itself a different look when shot at 1.2 that the 135 can't entirely replace). The difference there is if 135 is too short I can grab the 300...which if you're shooting outdoor sports is an important note, if it's just portraits you could zoom with your feet.


Website (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,646 posts
Gallery: 134 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1000
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
Apr 09, 2013 14:42 |  #8

mike_311 wrote in post #15808206 (external link)
it needs to be sharp, and i know i wont get sharper. right now the 85 is my longest lens, and i need more length on occasion and sometimes i just cant move to the spot i need to be.

i know a 70-200 is in my future, but im not sure if i need to go all into the 2.8 or if he 4L will work for now.

i mainly shoot outdoors when light inst really an issue and im usually stopped down to the f4 or more anyway, just not sure if i will miss the ability to go shallow or if its plenty sharp wide open.

With your requirements, I think that the f4 should be all you need. I use it and even add a 1.4x II teleconverter for outdoor shots and haven't had any problems at all. Quite the opposite - this is an amazing lens. Like Gonzogolf said above, the IS version is great. Even if half your work is on a tripod, when you hand hold it, the IS is a godsend. Better to have it when you don't need it than not have it when you do.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rocky ­ Rhode
Goldmember
Avatar
1,416 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Sacramento
     
Apr 09, 2013 14:46 as a reply to  @ Preeb's post |  #9

For me it came down to the “need” for f/2.8 as I occasionally shoot weddings, and indoor events; since purchasing a 2(x) teleconverter I am overjoyed that I opted for the extra cash up front.


GEAR LIST Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_311
THREAD ­ STARTER
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 560
Joined Mar 2011
     
Apr 09, 2013 15:20 |  #10

great comments, no sports here, strictly portraits. i have though about the idea of getting a 135 to supplement instead but they don't make a nonL version., and if im dropping that kind of money, i may as get a 70-200.

i really just work with a 50 and 85 now. part of me is content, but there are times when i wish for longer, like when i don't want to get right in someones face.

is the 4L very sharp at f4 or does it need to be stopped down?


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
30,210 posts
Gallery: 277 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 8293
Joined Dec 2006
     
Apr 09, 2013 15:58 |  #11

mike_311 wrote in post #15808821 (external link)
great comments, no sports here, strictly portraits. i have though about the idea of getting a 135 to supplement instead but they don't make a nonL version., and if im dropping that kind of money, i may as get a 70-200.

i really just work with a 50 and 85 now. part of me is content, but there are times when i wish for longer, like when i don't want to get right in someones face.

is the 4L very sharp at f4 or does it need to be stopped down?

I have a 70-200, but it gathers dust in favor of the 135L for portrait use. Unless you can get the 70-200 2.8 IS II its not even close. You need to be specific about which variations of the 70-200 you are considering because the IS versions are optically different than the non-IS so there is a difference in performance in each.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
L.J.G.
"Not brigth enough"
Avatar
10,463 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 45
Joined Jul 2010
Location: ɹǝpun uʍop
     
Apr 09, 2013 16:29 |  #12

Have a look at this video

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=n_g2JRj-V-E (external link)

It may offer you some help.


Lloyd
Never make the same mistake twice, there are so many new ones, try a different one each day
Gear Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,254 posts
Likes: 85
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Apr 09, 2013 16:47 |  #13

I have both the 70-200/4 IS and original 70-200/2.8 IS... as well as 85/1.8 and 135/2.

Trust me... For portraiture, keep your 85/1.8 and add the 135/2L! On your 5DII both are superb portrait lenses. For portraiture, the zooms will not be better in any way and give you less control over depth of field (are f2.8 at best). The "Canon white" zooms are larger, heavier to hold for long sessions, and more intimidating to non-professional subjects, too. The only real advantage the zooms bring is the convenience of not having to move yourself, to get the composition your want. I use them for sports, but generally not for portraiture.

I happily used 50/1.4 (left) and 85/1.8 (right) for portraits on crop cameras for years...

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8083/8300648819_476a9f55d2_z.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3456/5805118576_8f2c0ca5c0_z.jpg

I still use both those lenses on both crop and full frame cameras. But the day I ordered my 5D Mark II (almost four years ago), I also ordered the 135/2L. I knew I'd want it for portraits, having used 135mm lenses a lot when I was shooting film back in the good/bad old days. If I were buying the camera again today, I'd do exactly the same.

You haven't really experienced a Canon portrait lens until you get the 135/2 for use on your full frame camera. The problem is, if all you shoot is portraits, after using the 135/2L for a little while, you might find yourself wanting an 85/1.2L II and a 50/1.2L! It can be an expensive addiction.

The 135/2 works very well with a quality 1.4X teleconverter, too, for an effective 189mm f2.8. If interested in that, I'd recommend the Canon 1.4X II or III, Kenko DG or DGX "Pro 300" 1.4X (and have recently heard really good things about the cheaper Kenko MC4 DGX 1.4X too, but haven't had a chance to try one yet). I've used it particularly with the Canon 1.4X II and notice minimal loss of IQ or AF speed. I would expect IQ from the Kenkos to hold up, but there might be some drop in AF speed.

Sure, I occasionally use a 70-200 for portraiture and it works pretty well..

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8351/8315635848_dd1036ce61_b.jpg


But I'd rather use the 135/2 much of the time, when I don't need the convenience of the zoom. The "portrait" below of my cat was likely the very first shot I ever took with the 135L (she often was the subject of any new gear and like to help unpack things)... This was on my 5DII, wide open at f2.0 abd near the lens' minimum focus distance, with the camera at ISO 6400 and 1/200 shutter, handheld...

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8051/8112941582_436a1bfe8d_b.jpg


Here's the 135/2 on 5DII at a greater distance and f4...

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8265507890_56bd33c2d8_z.jpg



On a crop camera, the 135/2 is sort of like a "poor man's" 200/2L (without the IS of course), here on 7D at f5....

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8500/8345941561_6b801c975a_z.jpg


And, yeah, the 300/4 IS is an interesting portrait lens... but you'll need a lot of working distance with it!

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8313/8004822165_d900ff2efb_z.jpg


Heck, a 500/4 IS with a 1.4X on it can be a portrait lens too... even more working distance needed.

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8361/8305087664_15ef99dcc6_z.jpg

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
mike_311
THREAD ­ STARTER
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 560
Joined Mar 2011
     
Apr 09, 2013 17:59 |  #14

i can add the 70-200 for a few hundred or i can get the 135L for $1300. hmmm

but thanks for fueling my lust.


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brules
Senior Member
Avatar
521 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 79
Joined Jun 2010
Location: OKC
     
Apr 09, 2013 21:19 |  #15

If you can do without the 2.8 for DOF, get the F4L IS. Its sharper than the standard F4 and the 2.8L/ IS Mk 1.


S100 | 5D III | 16-35 F4 IS L | 35 F1.4L | 40 2.8 | 85 F1.2 II L | 135 F2 L | 70-200 F2.8 IS II L

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

3,863 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 4Lor 2.8L
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 mezcalpaloma
772 guests, 273 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.