Need a another opinion

Discussion in 'Canon Lenses' started by Scuba, Jan 6, 2013.

  1. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    Ok so I have been saving for a while and finally have the cash to make a move. I am primarily a landscape guy and currently have a 17-40mm f/4L and a nifty fifty 1.8 and a Canon 5D classic. However, I am trying to keep my options open to some outdoor natural light portrait photography. I have also considered trying being a second shooter in a wedding or two. Obviously I am limited by my glass right now which is why am looking at the 70-200mm lens series. I am pretty much set on the 70-200mm f/4 IS due to the image quality, IS, and weight. I have used the 70-200m f/2.8 model in the past for a few weeks and man is it heavy. What are the thoughts on which lens would be a better choice? I am looking in the $900 range. (I am looking at used lenses). I would prefer primes (85 1.8, 135 f/2, 200 f/2.8) but with money restrictions I think the zoom is the better option at this time.

    Choices I have concidered are: (used) Open to other options.
    70-200 f/4 ~$450-500
    70-200 f/4 IS $800-1000
    70-200 f/2.8 $900-1100
    24-105 f/4 IS $800-950 (i think, haven't checked prices that much)
  2. pixmedic
    Offline

    pixmedic Mooderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Messages:
    7,678
    Likes Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central Florida
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +3,326 / 0
    scuba's a funny word.


    have you considered getting a sigma 70-200 f/2.8 with image stabilization?
    its supposed to be a good lens and within your budget. that way you get the f/2.8 AND IS.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 11, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    I have a little bit but not seriously. Should I? I don't know a whole lot about it. I believe I have heard it is slow focusing. It does weigh twice what the canon f4 does though and that is a concern.
  4. jbkm1994
    Offline

    jbkm1994 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0
    I can't speak to the other lenses you mentioned as I don't have any of them but I just bought the 70-200mm F/2.8L USM and it shoots fantastic shots. I would have preferred the IS but didn't have the dough. I haven't been disappointed with my purchase though as I usually shoot with a relatively high shutter speed. Keep us up to date on your purchase decision!
  5. spd
    Offline

    spd New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NZ
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0
    100-400 IS?

    Just an idea...i do like mine (even on a crop, on a full frame it should do what you need).
  6. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    I borrowed a f/2.8 for about a month and got some good shots with it, but damn was it heavy.
  7. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    I looked a little bit at it. However it is a tank and I don't need that much reach. I just don't think it will help me explore the portraits as well as my landscape as well at a 70-200. Still open to it though
  8. Robin_Usagani
    Offline

    Robin_Usagani New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    1,721
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Littleton, Colorado
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1,094 / 0
    If you want to do weddings, f/2.8 or faster.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. jbkm1994
    Offline

    jbkm1994 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0
    It is heavy but look at it this way...it will save you a monthly gym membership!
  10. 07Vios
    Offline

    07Vios New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2012
    Messages:
    317
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0
    Yeah, if you're planning on doing weddings, get the 2.8 version of the 70-200. Lots of churches do not allow flash photography, even if it is for a wedding. Also, IS might help if you don't want to use a tripod. The 135 f2L might be another good choice, but you'll need another camera and/or lens with a shorter focal length.
  11. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    That is what I have always heard and read. However, f4 with IS of 3-4 stops beats f2.8 non is. Then throw in the weight effecting the shots as well. I don't have any experience with weddings so maybe I am wrong.
  12. 07Vios
    Offline

    07Vios New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2012
    Messages:
    317
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0
    I have a friend who shoots weddings from time to time. He used his 17-50mm f2.8 lens, and borrowed my Sigma 30mm f1.4 lens one time, and my Canon 85mm f1.8 lens another time.

    Also, like I asked, do you plan on shooting with a tripod or a monopod?
  13. Robin_Usagani
    Offline

    Robin_Usagani New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    1,721
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Littleton, Colorado
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1,094 / 0
    IS wont do anything if the subject is moving.

  14. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    Yeah I do plan on using a tripod for my landscape. Portraits I prob wouldn't.
  15. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    Yes I do understand that.
  16. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    OK let's forget that I mentioned a wedding. It is just an off the wall thought that is not much of a reality. Think landscape, horse farms, and possibly portraits (also only a future possibility).
  17. EIngerson
    Offline

    EIngerson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,710
    Likes Received:
    1,061
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Okinawa, Japan
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1,061 / 0
    I have the 70-200 F4 L and absolutely love it. It's sharp as a tack and fast. That said, I will upgrade to the current 2.8 eventually, but I won't get rid of the F4.
  18. KenC
    Offline

    KenC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,713
    Likes Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +562 / 0
    If you could find a way to stretch your budget a little you could have the 85/1.8 and the 200/2.8. Range covered, more speed, probably better sharpness. Wouldn't be as good for events or candids because you would have to have two bodies or switch lenses, but for the stuff you say you'll be doing most, it shouldn't be a problem.
  19. Scuba
    Offline

    Scuba New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +63 / 0
    That is a possibility I hadn't considered yet. Is the 85 1.8 as sharp at the 70-200 f/4 IS though? I am stretching the budget pretty hard as it is. I was originally planning on the f/4 non IS version and then changed to the IS version. However, two lenes can be bought at separate times too. Would the 85 to 200mm jump leave a big focal length hole?
  20. Robin_Usagani
    Offline

    Robin_Usagani New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    1,721
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Littleton, Colorado
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1,094 / 0
    If you shoot a wedding and you want to shoot with primes, you need to shoot with 2 camera bodies. You should stick with zoom if you shoot with only 1 body. It is a good idea to buy another camera body if you want to start taking on a wedding as a main. As 2nd shooter, 1 body is fine.

Share This Page