call me crazy (135+1.4 tcon vs 70-200)

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
You mean the one where we have to listen to the blow hard that "Gunny" turned into once he decided to spend more $$$ on equipment than anyone else in recent history... and thus is an expert?

FYI.. It was less than a year ago that Gunny first blew into FM without a clue, asking all the same questions in threads and PMs etc...

I know.. I answered a parcel of them.

He is now, after spending 30K in under a year, merely regurgitating 10 months of assimilated crap, and reposting the same Dog picture so often he can't even keep track of the fact in a single thread!


Anyway.. IMHO.. yes the 135mm is "sharper" ... but is it so much that it will blow away your 70-200mm f/2.8?

With a 4Mp sensor will it be noticeable?

Will a slight improvement is overall sharpness outweigh the advantages of a flexible zoom range?

These are the questions that you need to ponder.

After thinking about it some i think i've come to the conclusion that i should just keep my 70-200. Mainly for the first two points you make. There is a reason i bought the 70-200...it is sharp, and man is it sharp!

www.questphotos.com/be​ard.jpg (6mp image)

The one thing i noticed while going through some vollyball pictures last night is that i'm worring less about how "nice" my photos look, rather then how GOOD they look.

The 1D kind of does that, it enables me to capture stuff i couldnt dream of capturing (at least this consitantly) with my 300D. But 4mp, noise etc, really hurts the niceness of these photos.

Such as the image i took above. It was fairly creative, and it looks amazingly nice...but i'd take my dirty looking low mp Spike shot any day over that!

I'll get it someday, but i think being impatient would be a mistake.

Nice picture!

if you are rarely at anything other than 70 or 200, why would you desire a lens at 135?

For me 135 seems pretty useless. It's generally too long to be a portrait lens, but too short to be considered ultra-telephoto. I'd stick with the 70-200 and buy a 1.4x TC.

Have you seen the pictures from the 135? Anyone with a photographic brain can understand someones desire for the lens. Speed kills

135 is a perfect length for basketball/vollyball-indoor gym shots.

Not to mention it is f/2, a full stop faster then my lens.

a 280mm f/4 lens is pretty useless to me.

What about the 200/2.8?

You'll have a very fine 200/2.8 lens, but also a 280/4.0 lens with the 1.4 TCON.

And I assume it would be cheaper than the 135/2 L.

Best regards,
Andy

He already has the 70-200 f/2.8, so he's got the speed of the 200 (but an added "bonus" 1.5 lb or so to carry around - now there's a reason for changing to the 135 - weighs less!)

What doesn't kill us only makes us stronger ^^;;

As for crazy or not, I'll toss a vote in for crazy If anything, keep the 70-200 f/2.8 and buy the 135 f/2... for the reason CDS stated and you agreed with. It wouldn't be fun come next football season when you decide you need the 70-200 f/2.8 again, and didn't have it. You can always hold on to it until next season, and if you find you're not using it then, then sell it if that's what seems right... I don't think that lens will lose value anytime soon.

I really dont think thats something i've grasped yet.

I bought a 2x tcon but sold it due to lack of use. I hadnt really occured to me that the only money i lost was the $4 paypal fee.

I'm just so use to my toys losing value...quickly (computers for example).

I have both. I like both. but I think they really have different uses. When you need a zoom u need a zoom. But of late I've been going back to primes and was really pleased with some landscapes I did this spring with the 135 and 135 with TC 1.4x. Great stuff. I think it had the edge overall on the 70-200 2.8. But I will keep both for now as they are both needed for different needs. And the 70-200 is darn fine with the TC as well.

Although I personaly think the 135 has the edge over the 70-200 I don't think you will be "blown away" with improvement in every photo you take, though some photos will be better. It's really a matter of what you're shooting and your style. Another advantage of the 135 is it is smaller, lighter (and a little less conspicuous in black).

If you can afford it I would just add to it one at a time, maybe the 1.4TC then get the prime later when funds allow. Or get the prime and shoot with it a bit and if you don't feel you need the zoom, sell and get the TC....

I agree totally