Revalation...my first zoom (70-200 f/2.8L IS) and what primes have done for me.

I sold my 200/2.8L on eBay this week and picked up a 70-200/2.8L IS. The 70-200 is my first zoom if you can believe it.

After dinner I went to a local park with the wife and kids to test her out on my 5D.

Here's the revalation: after almost a year of shooting with nothing but primes it seemed like I could dial in the propper focal length without looking through the viewfinder. I knew instantly which focal length to use. See, using all primes was good for something after all.

And, I must say, the 70-200 IS is not too shabby....for a non-prime that is. I love the bokeh.



200mm: f/4; 1/400s; ISO 200.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

very nice. I just sold off all but one of my zooms. Been a prime guy for some time. This is one outstanding zoomer!! Congrats!!!

Nice shots.....DA ZOOM will seldom let you down.
Could not help noticing your cleverly selected primes....just about the best ones up to 300 mm that Canon makes, with a noted reservation about the 14L.

However, IMO the 200 f/2.8 is not a lens to part with unless one is disappointed with its performance....which seems to happen very seldom......the lens is simply that good, even if only used once in a blue moon.

lensview wrote in post #2014561
Nice shots.....DA ZOOM will seldom let you down.
Could not help noticing your cleverly selected primes....just about the best ones up to 300 mm that Canon makes, with a noted reservation about the 14L.

However, IMO the 200 f/2.8 is not a lens to part with unless one is disappointed with its performance....which seems to happen very seldom......the lens is simply that good, even if only used once in a blue moon.

Thanks.

My 200/2.8L performed flawlessly. I was in no way disappointed with that wonderful lens.

I just never seemed to use it. It always seemed that whatever the 200 can do the 300/4 IS can do better. If there's room for the 200 there always seems to be room for the 300. Once that became apparent I never used the 200.

And yeah, the 14L....I'm still waiting for that one to prove itself useful in some way.....in any way. Dumb purchase (so far), no doubt about it.

Here's one taken with the 200....jeeze, just looking at this shot makes me kind of regret the sale.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

I think that the 70-200/2.8 (IS or regular) is about as good as a zoom can get. I was stunned at what mine could do wide open. It's definately a lens that I never felt to be inadequate.

AeroSmith wrote in post #2014609
Thanks.

My 200/2.8L performed flawlessly. I was in no way disappointed with that wonderful lens.

I just never seemed to use it. It always seemed that whatever the 200 can do the 300/4 IS can do better. If there's room for the 200 there always seems to be room for the 300. Once that became apparent I never used the 200.

And yeah, the 14L....I'm still waiting for that one to prove itself useful in some way.....in any way. Dumb purchase (so far), no doubt about it.

Here's one taken with the 200....jeeze, just looking at this shot makes me kind of regret the sale.

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Righto, that is one lovely shot.....just looking at the juxtaposition of the girl's image and the water surface in the background.

I got no time for prime. jk