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 12 Sep 2009 (Saturday) 22:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

IS or 2.8

 
20DNewbie
"don't listen to me, I'm an idiot"
Avatar
2,732 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Massachusetts
     
Sep 13, 2009 18:28 |  #46

DDCSD wrote in post #8637456 (external link)
Have you ever used the 70-200 f/2.8? Yeah, its plenty heavy, but it hardly needs tripod (or even a monopod, for that matter). Especially for sports. :rolleyes:

+1 on that.


Christian.
Feedback: POTN - FM (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Sep 13, 2009 18:36 |  #47

sethultimate wrote in post #8637364 (external link)
snob what?

I am a photographer, don't you think that I know the difference between a 2.8 lens and f/4?

what is this?

of course the 2.8 is better, of course

and that's out of the question

now get this picture (literally):
I need you to cover a soccer game, today: it starts at 7:30PM and will end at 9PM . from 800/3.5 to 3200/2.8 and from 1/1000 to 1/400 minimum
what do you do? bring the F4? and what about if you need a 1.4x or you don't want to bring the 300 or 400?
it's not about the ability to take a shot once in a while, it's about shooting or pack the lens and cameras and go home (or don't even go there in the first place because you don't have the lens for the task).

A) I showed you EVIDENCE, not HYPOTHETICALS of a shoot with WORSE conditions than your Soccer Match. And showed you shutter speeds FASTER than your requirement. And guess what? I used the f/4L.

B) If you throw the 1.4x or 2x into the mix its a TOTALLY different ballgame, because of the light loss. If you want to hawk that its f/2.8 or go home, you can't bring the 1.4x into the mix, because your f/2.8 is now a f/4.

So pack in your hypothetical textbook cases and your f/2.8-snobbishness and go home.


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeassk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2006
Location: San Diego/ San Fran/ Berkeley
     
Sep 13, 2009 18:59 |  #48

F4 is too slow for indoor sports (Unless you want to use ISO 12000ish).
F2.8 Is heavy.

The first few points in the thread were actually quite productive,
you should use the extra money for some more equipment,

Like a flash or a tripod.

I owned the non IS 2.8 before I got the 2.8 IS and did not really like it for most things. It is very hard to get sharp shots when shooting below 1/200th of a second hand held.

The f4 IS will let you shoot at slower shutter speeds if the scene calls for it.


Stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
Avatar
13,313 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
Location: South Dakota
     
Sep 13, 2009 19:25 |  #49

nureality wrote in post #8638112 (external link)
A) I showed you EVIDENCE, not HYPOTHETICALS of a shoot with WORSE conditions than your Soccer Match. And showed you shutter speeds FASTER than your requirement. And guess what? I used the f/4L.

B) If you throw the 1.4x or 2x into the mix its a TOTALLY different ballgame, because of the light loss. If you want to hawk that its f/2.8 or go home, you can't bring the 1.4x into the mix, because your f/2.8 is now a f/4.

So pack in your hypothetical textbook cases and your f/2.8-snobbishness and go home.

Actually, you've shown us nothing.

Here is where your link leads:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE



Regardless of what is in your Flickr page, it likely doesn't prove much. The only thing that it likely does prove is that the f/4L is a great lens when you have enough light to work with.

Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=9903477#p​ost9903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rubberhead
Goldmember
Avatar
1,899 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2006
Location: South Carolina's Lowcountry
     
Sep 13, 2009 20:10 |  #50

20DNewbie wrote in post #8636076 (external link)
While it's a general rule it's most definitely not an absolute. I've gone down to 1/50 @200mm(non-IS) while shooting a MMA fight that's decent enough for the web. I just try to wait for the moment of the strike to minimize the blur at that speed.

It's about shake from handholding, not motion blur. If you are shooting 1/50sec on a 200mm on a 1.6cf, you've got to be on a monopod at least.


EQUIPMENT: 40D | Rebel XT | EF 70-200mm f/4L IS | EF-S 10-22mm | EF 28-135mm IS | EF-S 18-55mm IS | EF 50mm 1.8 - flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DStanic
Cream of the Crop
6,148 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Canada
     
Sep 13, 2009 20:14 |  #51

DDCSD wrote in post #8637456 (external link)
Have you ever used the 70-200 f/2.8? Yeah, its plenty heavy, but it hardly needs tripod (or even a monopod, for that matter). Especially for sports. :rolleyes:

Sorry I should clarify- tripod needed in low light for shutter speeds lower then 1/200 (give or take), whereas an IS version of a 70-200 can be handheld down to 1/60 or even lower. It is heavy but yes the average person should not have issues holding it by hand.


Sony A6000, 16-50PZ, 55-210, 35mm 1.8 OSS
Canon 60D, 30D
Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 17-35, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 85mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lsman
Member
56 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Sep 13, 2009 20:16 |  #52

both.. .LOL. can't live without them...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rubberhead
Goldmember
Avatar
1,899 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2006
Location: South Carolina's Lowcountry
     
Sep 13, 2009 20:16 |  #53

20DNewbie wrote in post #8636076 (external link)
While it's a general rule it's most definitely not an absolute. I've gone down to 1/50 @200mm(non-IS) while shooting a MMA fight that's decent enough for the web. I just try to wait for the moment of the strike to minimize the blur at that speed.

You bring up another point. IS is great for purposefully shooting motion blur. A boxer throwing a punch were the face and body are relatively still even at 1/50sec, but the hand/arm are moving fast enough to get good blur. That's a great shot, but needs IS, or a monopod.

Here's kind'a what I mean - shot handheld at 1/8sec, 106mm on a 1.6 cf with the 70-200mm f/4L IS:

IMAGE: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2088/2344010367_a724875ee3_b.jpg

EQUIPMENT: 40D | Rebel XT | EF 70-200mm f/4L IS | EF-S 10-22mm | EF 28-135mm IS | EF-S 18-55mm IS | EF 50mm 1.8 - flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Sep 13, 2009 21:42 |  #54

DDCSD wrote in post #8638361 (external link)
Actually, you've shown us nothing.

Here is where your link leads:
IMAGE NOT FOUND
| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE



Regardless of what is in your Flickr page, it likely doesn't prove much. The only thing that it likely does prove is that the f/4L is a great lens when you have enough light to work with.

http://www.flickr.com …04/sets/7215761​8689695556 (external link)


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Sep 13, 2009 22:14 |  #55

DDCSD wrote in post #8637456 (external link)
Have you ever used the 70-200 f/2.8? Yeah, its plenty heavy, but it hardly needs tripod (or even a monopod, for that matter). Especially for sports. :rolleyes:

I've never used one but, purely anecdotal, when I went to the Fashion Week in town the one thing I noticed was that I was the only one with an f4 and I was the only one that wasn't using a monopod or a tripod. I kid you not, I was the only one.

The tripods were the paid pros. All of them, every one had their camera on a tripod in the "pit" at the end of the stage and not all were using 70-200's. There were 2 with 24-70's and they were also on tripods. They would pack their rig and move to the next stage and wait for that show to start. There were multiple catwalks.

The one thing I noticed is that there is no time to rest. You are pretty much constantly shooting at these events, with the camera at eye level with very short opportunities to lower the camera to chimp, if necessary.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nik.hisham
Senior Member
Avatar
745 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Sep 13, 2009 22:29 |  #56

Rubberhead wrote in post #8638649 (external link)
You bring up another point. IS is great for purposefully shooting motion blur. A boxer throwing a punch were the face and body are relatively still even at 1/50sec, but the hand/arm are moving fast enough to get good blur. That's a great shot, but needs IS, or a monopod.

Here's kind'a what I mean - shot handheld at 1/8sec, 106mm on a 1.6 cf with the 70-200mm f/4L IS:

QUOTED IMAGE

That's a great shot! Gotta remember to try that next time...


5D Mark II | 50 F1.8 II | 35L | 17-40L | 38-76 "Macro" | 580EX II | 430EX
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
Avatar
13,313 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
Location: South Dakota
     
Sep 13, 2009 22:34 |  #57


Most of us don't shoot internationally televised events. You had a ton of light to work with there, for a night event.


Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=9903477#p​ost9903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DDCSD
GIVIN' GOOD KARMA
Avatar
13,313 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
Location: South Dakota
     
Sep 13, 2009 22:36 |  #58

bohdank wrote in post #8639214 (external link)
I've never used one but, purely anecdotal, when I went to the Fashion Week in town the one thing I noticed was that I was the only one with an f4 and I was the only one that wasn't using a monopod or a tripod. I kid you not, I was the only one.

The tripods were the paid pros. All of them, every one had their camera on a tripod in the "pit" at the end of the stage and not all were using 70-200's. There were 2 with 24-70's and they were also on tripods. They would pack their rig and move to the next stage and wait for that show to start. There were multiple catwalks.

The one thing I noticed is that there is no time to rest. You are pretty much constantly shooting at these events, with the camera at eye level with very short opportunities to lower the camera to chimp, if necessary.

There's a good chance that they had their cameras/lenses on a tripod because every shot was going to basically be the same. I'm guessing the models stop and turn at the same place on the runway every time. They just need to set the camera up, pre-focus and trip the shutter when the model hits their mark.

It makes sense for something like that, where the subject will always be in the same place and you're only going to get one type of shot anyways. I highly doubt it was because the lenses were too heavy to hold or to eliminate camera shake. Most of them use flashes for that stuff anyways, don't they?


Derek
Bucketman Karma Fund
https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=9903477#p​ost9903477
POTN FF L2 MadTown Birds


Full Gear List & Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CAL ­ Imagery
Goldmember
Avatar
3,375 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2008
Location: O-H
     
Sep 13, 2009 22:57 |  #59

2.8 for stopping action.
IS for not.

Or, I would just save up for the 2.8 IS to be able to stop action and shoot slow moving objects in caves.


Christian

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sethultimate
Member
212 posts
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 14, 2009 00:19 |  #60

nureality wrote in post #8638112 (external link)
A) I showed you EVIDENCE, not HYPOTHETICALS of a shoot with WORSE conditions than your Soccer Match. And showed you shutter speeds FASTER than your requirement. And guess what? I used the f/4L.

not really.
look:
2.8 is better than 4. ya know? you don't? well now you do.

I'm not interested in your snaps.

that's how it is.

keep screaming but it won't change the fact that in order to get my attention you should produce much more than that.

B) If you throw the 1.4x or 2x into the mix its a TOTALLY different ballgame, because of the light loss. If you want to hawk that its f/2.8 or go home, you can't bring the 1.4x into the mix, because your f/2.8 is now a f/4.

2.8 is better than 4. also because of that
period

LOL

So pack in your hypothetical textbook cases and your f/2.8-snobbishness and go home.


you are now becoming insolent and also annoying.

gonna ask you to step back please.If you don't want to know about lenses then fine, but I can't allow you to get all excited and insolent with me. I don't like it. And if I don't like it then we have a problem here.




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

5,204 views & 0 likes for this thread
IS or 2.8
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 Phis1989
659 guests, 284 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.