Austin Greene
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2012
- Messages
- 1,472
- Reaction score
- 855
- Location
- Mountain View, California
- Website
- www.austingreenephotography.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Edit: I should say that I have a buyer for my 70-200 f/4L IS for 1100. Combine that with a work discount through Canon and I'm looking at transitioning to the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II for $750. Selling my 85 could get me $350 towards those costs. That's the gist here, do I sell my 85 f/1.8, or keep it around? The mindset here is portraits, and weddings.
Well, here we are. After roughly 1.5 years of owning it, I am selling my 70-200 f/4L IS. It served me well for a time, but in all honesty, has not found it's way onto my camera since buying my 85mm f/1.8 in March and discovering the gift of amazing bokeh for portraits. But I suppose, there is a bright side to this...
I'm buying the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II! Or at least, I think I am? I feel satisfied with the performance of my 17-40 on the landscape front, but I hated the fact that my 70-200 was always left sitting in a drawer during portrait shoots. It simply couldn't stack up to the 85 in terms of versatility (aperture wise).
Now the question is whether or not I go forwards and buy the f/2.8 version, and if so, do I then sell my 85mm? The only thing that makes me think I'd keep the 85mm is that it is a great compact lens. But then again, it does seem redundant to keep it around, and the money from selling it could buy me a good insurance plan to ensure I feel comfy toting the 70-200 around without fear of dropping it.
So what do you think? Is my logic sound here? Do I sell the 85mm? I'm rearing to finally get into weddings, and I regularly have portrait shoots almost every weekend. My only other consideration is the 24-70, but while it's a great lens, I don't think it would be as versatile. A purchase for later years, perhaps. Also, the discount Canon offers my employer is much greater on the 70-200 than the 24-70.
Thoughts? I use the lens regularly at work, but that's for product photography. I love it, but I suppose I'm really asking more a question on whether or not to sell my 85mm. Will it become relegated to my drawer as the original 70-200 was? If so, I think I'd be better off selling it.
Well, here we are. After roughly 1.5 years of owning it, I am selling my 70-200 f/4L IS. It served me well for a time, but in all honesty, has not found it's way onto my camera since buying my 85mm f/1.8 in March and discovering the gift of amazing bokeh for portraits. But I suppose, there is a bright side to this...
I'm buying the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II! Or at least, I think I am? I feel satisfied with the performance of my 17-40 on the landscape front, but I hated the fact that my 70-200 was always left sitting in a drawer during portrait shoots. It simply couldn't stack up to the 85 in terms of versatility (aperture wise).
Now the question is whether or not I go forwards and buy the f/2.8 version, and if so, do I then sell my 85mm? The only thing that makes me think I'd keep the 85mm is that it is a great compact lens. But then again, it does seem redundant to keep it around, and the money from selling it could buy me a good insurance plan to ensure I feel comfy toting the 70-200 around without fear of dropping it.
So what do you think? Is my logic sound here? Do I sell the 85mm? I'm rearing to finally get into weddings, and I regularly have portrait shoots almost every weekend. My only other consideration is the 24-70, but while it's a great lens, I don't think it would be as versatile. A purchase for later years, perhaps. Also, the discount Canon offers my employer is much greater on the 70-200 than the 24-70.
Thoughts? I use the lens regularly at work, but that's for product photography. I love it, but I suppose I'm really asking more a question on whether or not to sell my 85mm. Will it become relegated to my drawer as the original 70-200 was? If so, I think I'd be better off selling it.
Last edited: