Which 70-200 non is

Looking at picking up a 70-200, I have my eyes set on one of the following

Canon 70-200 f4
Tamron 70-200 f2.8
Sigma 70-200 f2.8

All are the non IS versions, of those 3 which would you pick. I am looking to make my way into weddings and would assume the 2.8 would be needed.

Thanks for your help in advance.

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #17263573
Looking at picking up a 70-200, I have my eyes set on one of the following

Canon 70-200 f4
Tamron 70-200 f2.8
Sigma 70-200 f2.8

All are the non IS versions, of those 3 which would you pick. I am looking to make my way into weddings and would assume the 2.8 would be needed.

Thanks for your help in advance.

Heya,

I would get the 70-200 F4L IS, or a Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC, if you're looking to be in that price range. The Canon 70-200 F2.8 non-IS lenses are good, but they're on the soft side of the 70-200's when wide open, which sort of defeats the point of getting F2.8. The F4L IS is sharp wide open, and has great IS. So it's a good lens in low light, and fast enough for a wedding. The Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC has that F2.8, is pretty sharp wide open, and has VC (IS equivalent), so for the money it's a great wedding lens.

Very best,

For wedding work any non IS 70-200 is going to be challenged. If you have to maintain 1/200 to handhold even 2.8 isnt going to be fast enough for most wedding venues. I've been able to handhold my canon f4IS at 1/30 if needed.

Sounds like I need to stretch the budget a bit more then to get an IS version

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #17263646
Sounds like I need to stretch the budget a bit more then to get an IS version

Heya,

It really makes a difference. When shooting a wedding, there's no re-do. So you must get the shot. You can fix grain from high ISO use. You can fix minor exposure problems. But you cannot fix motion blur. This is why a lens with good IS (or equivalent) and good high ISO performance are ideal for the non-flash shots in weddings.

I'd roll two 6D's, one with a 35 F1.4 (alt, 50 F1.4) and one with 85 F1.4 (alt, 135 F2 or 200 F2.8).
Otherwise, if you're a zoom guy, 35 F1.4 and 70-200 F4L IS.
Two bodies. Flash. Always. 6D's for the high ISO performance for when you cannot use flash. IS and/or F1.4 option for when you cannot use flash to ensure enough speed or stability to not get blur.

Very best,

I currently have a 30 1.4, will be picking up an 85 1.8 either the canon 100 or Tamron 90 2.8, and a Tokina 11-16 f2.8 it was really just the 70-200 range that had me stumped with so many choices.

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #17263672
I currently have a 30 1.4, will be picking up an 85 1.8 either the canon 100 or Tamron 90 2.8, and a Tokina 11-16 f2.8 it was really just the 70-200 range that had me stumped with so many choices.

Heya,

If you're really wanting ot get into weddings, I'd focus on having two bodies more than just having a 70-200, especially since you're shooting APS-C (70-200 is a different lens on APS-C, it's pretty long there, I wouldn't want it unless I was 2nd shooter in the background, way in the background). Your 30 F1.4 and either the 85/90/100 flavor on the other body would be excellent for wedding. One on each body. Even an inexpensive entry rebel body as a 2nd body would be great rather than just getting a long zoom. Plus, shooting APS-C, you're better off with F1.4 so that you can get more shutter speed, and use less ISO for the same exposure since APS-C doesn't handle high ISO super great (well, most APS-C, depends what you're shooting of course).

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17263683
Heya,

If you're really wanting ot get into weddings, I'd focus on having two bodies more than just having a 70-200, especially since you're shooting APS-C (70-200 is a different lens on APS-C, it's pretty long there, I wouldn't want it unless I was 2nd shooter in the background, way in the background). Your 30 F1.4 and either the 85/90/100 flavor on the other body would be excellent for wedding. One on each body. Even an inexpensive entry rebel body as a 2nd body would be great rather than just getting a long zoom. Plus, shooting APS-C, you're better off with F1.4 so that you can get more shutter speed, and use less ISO for the same exposure since APS-C doesn't handle high ISO super great (well, most APS-C, depends what you're shooting of course).

Very best,

I will be shooting with a 70d and have not yet decided what to pick up for my backup. I don't plan to be doing weddings next week it's just something that is in the pipeline so want to be smart with my purchases.

For the same price roughly as the Canon 70-200 f/4L IS, the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC seems to be getting pretty good rep...

That said, AF is critical for weddings, and I was underwhelmed by the AF consistency of the 24-70 Tamron...

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #17263728
I will be shooting with a 70d and have not yet decided what to pick up for my backup. I don't plan to be doing weddings next week it's just something that is in the pipeline so want to be smart with my purchases.

This is exactly why I would re-consider the 70-200 on APS-C. It's a very commonly talked about lens for this. But 70mm on APS-C at the wide end, is still very long. What do you do for the wide shots? You either swap lenses. Or you simply swing the other body with the wider lens up.

Frankly, the smarter purchase since you already have lenses, is a 2nd body (even if it's a much lesser aps-c than your 70D). I wouldn't take 200mm on APS-C to a wedding. Maybe attend a wedding or two and see what you think so you can figure out what's best for what you would want to do, to shoot it (so that there's no pressure and no need to get shots, just for experience regarding field of view and placement). A 2nd body and an 85 F1.8 would be my suggestion at this point as the smarter purchase for down the pipe line. But that's just my suggestion.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17263745
This is exactly why I would re-consider the 70-200 on APS-C. It's a very commonly talked about lens for this. But 70mm on APS-C at the wide end, is still very long. What do you do for the wide shots? You either swap lenses. Or you simply swing the other body with the wider lens up.

Frankly, the smarter purchase since you already have lenses, is a 2nd body (even if it's a much lesser aps-c than your 70D). I wouldn't take 200mm on APS-C to a wedding. Maybe attend a wedding or two and see what you think so you can figure out what's best for what you would want to do, to shoot it (so that there's no pressure and no need to get shots, just for experience regarding field of view and placement). A 2nd body and an 85 F1.8 would be my suggestion at this point as the smarter purchase for down the pipe line. But that's just my suggestion.

Very best,

Those 2 items are already budgeted for and will be purchased shortly. I am just worried at having 100mm be my longest as my next long lens will be the 150-600.

Littlejon Dsgn wrote in post #17263573
Looking at picking up a 70-200, I have my eyes set on one of the following

Canon 70-200 f4
Tamron 70-200 f2.8
Sigma 70-200 f2.8

All are the non IS versions, of those 3 which would you pick. I am looking to make my way into weddings and would assume the 2.8 would be needed.

Thanks for your help in advance.

The least expensive new 70-200mm f/2.8 lens on the market is the older design non-stabilized Tamron unit. One of those lenses generated these actual images.

gonzogolf wrote in post #17263631
For wedding work any non IS 70-200 is going to be challenged. If you have to maintain 1/200 to handhold even 2.8 isnt going to be fast enough for most wedding venues. I've been able to handhold my canon f4IS at 1/30 if needed.

Not true. I handhold a 80-200L 2.8 (almost always at f4) without flash during all weddings. Never had a problem.

Jarvis Creative Studios wrote in post #17264282
Not true. I handhold a 80-200L 2.8 (almost always at f4) without flash during all weddings. Never had a problem.

I'm glad for you. But the OP is using a crop body the ability to handhold is even more challenging. And you must be working brighter venues than the ones ive encountered. The new improved high ISO bodies help but I would still recommend the IS lens.