70-200mm or 70-400mm

fdrotary · May 21, 2009

other then money is there any reason to choose the 200mm over the 400mm lens? i am thinking of buying a telephoto soon and was wondering if i should save a little longer and just get the 400mm and not have to upgrade?

WTF? · May 21, 2009

well....when you buy a lens with a large zoom range, the optical quality tends to be less, thats why people use prime lenses, the inconvenience of no zoom is made up for in optical performance, so its up to you, do you want better optical quality or convenience of a long zoom?

benhasajeep · May 21, 2009

Well, I am guessing your talking about Nikon 70-200 or 80-400? Or same in Sigma flavor?

Anyway, the 70-200 will be the best if you want the best high quality lens. You will have the faster aperture f/2.8. And the 80-400 because of its large range will have a lower quality of output. But, we are talking in technacalities. As no doubt the 80-400 is a decent lens. Just with its large do all range, there will be some loss of quality. The 80-400 may suite your needs just fine as it has for many people. It really deppends if your looking for the best of the best. A a good quality lens.

Now something to consider. The Sigma 50-500 has a big following. Again its a jack of all lenses. But it has proven to be a good lens for not being from Nikon or Canon stables. Pricing wise you may be able to get the Sigma now if that range is what your looking for.

Ok, just went back and you were considering Canon 40D and 50D's. Canon has 4 70-200's. Need to know which your considereing. And their big range zoom is the 100-400? Or again the 70-200 and 80-400 in Sigma variety?

fdrotary · May 21, 2009

sorry i could have swore i saw a 70-400 but i was looking at canon's website directly after posting and realized i was wrong but i didn't have time to fix the post. You answered my question though, i was pretty sure image quality decreased but i wanted to be sure. I was just asking in advance because i tend to study things and read for weeks or months before i make a decision. I am going for the 24-70mm next, i am going to allow myself 1lens every 6months as a reward to myself for being here in Afghanistan and i don't want to waste my money. Does anyone know a good website to get advice on lens quality so i don't have to bug people everytime i want a new lens?

oh and here are some pics of my "shower buddy" in Afghanistan, i will post tons of pictures soon but i have to wait until leave for enough banwith to not take forever. I know both are a little out of focus, i have better ones but haven't put them up yet.

Godzilla on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Godzilla1 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

bdavis · May 21, 2009

If you're talking Nikon, then I would say get the 80-200 f/2.8. You can get 90% of the quality of the 70-200 at about half the price. Its an amazing lens too. Then all you have to do is spend $400 or so on a teleconverter to get the range up to 400mm. That way you have the best of both worlds.

benhasajeep · May 21, 2009

fdrotary said:
Does anyone know a good website to get advice on lens quality so i don't have to bug people everytime i want a new lens?

Popphoto.com and Shutterbug.com puts up their lens tests. Sure there are more out there. But just reading the posts here you can pick up alot of information by people using them everyday not just on some test bench. 24-70 f/2.8 and when you can 70-200f/2.8 is the way to go. Now if you want to add IS and such well you will have to determine if its worth it price wise to you personally.

And not everyone is bothered by lens questions all the time.

ANDS! · May 21, 2009

For the cost of that 80-400MM from Sigma, you could get the 70-200 USM (non IS) F/4, as well as a 2X Kenko telecoverter for much less (used on the lens side). You'd be looking at F/8 once the TC is taken into account, however depending on the light thats out there during Afghanistan days, and the ISO capability of your camera, this is most likely not a problem. Just a suggestion.