Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Or Canon 70 - 200mm F/2.8 L IS USM II

[sunlou]

Hello all,

I have to photo ops this coming week end and I wish to rent a lense.

I have the little sister's figure skating show (extremely low light, bad vantage poin as they have their assigned photographers and i can't go close to the rink and fast movement)

and a studio | boudoirish session of three women with 3 pro flashes and full studio setup.

Should i hire a

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM - 35$
Canon 70 - 200mm F/2.8 L IS USM II - 45$
Canon EF 85 mm F/1.2 L USM - 45$

I work with :

- rebel EOS 1000 (rebel XS)
- Sigma EF530 flash
- 50mm 1.8 Canon
- 70-300 3.5-5.6 sigma
- 18 - 55mm 3.5-5.6 Canon


My first reflex would be 70-200mm but i worry that in studio it'll be too zommed ... mind you i did use my 70 - 300 in this studio but i looked ackward being at the other end.


Please Help...​

 

[AustinPhotographer]

I use a 70-200 2.8 L IS (first generation) for just about everything in my studio. I have two other photographers in the same building who use the exact same setup. It's hard to beat the zoom/speed/focus speed. I've shot events in low-light situations with no supplemental lighting before, and have had good results even on my old first generation 5D at ISO 600 or so. Movements as fast a figure skating in extremely low lighting conditions might be pushing the limits of what any camera is capable of right now, but I'd still go for the 70-200.

 

[sunlou]

Thanks - she's 12 years old so they are not that fast .. i know my camera will be my real weak link there but...

 

[Juice]

I own both of the lenses in your thread title, and I can tell you that the 24-70mm is going to give you crap for performance when shooting the action shots. I would definitely take the 70-200, it is also great for portraits if you can get far enough away.

Wide open, the 24-70 takes a huge hit in sharpness when zoomed to 70mm, which is probably where you'd be shooting at, so I don't think you'd be happy with the results. Plus, the 70-200 has IS, which is perfect for sports (just make sure the IS is on mode 2).

 

[bottguardo]

I'm going to suggest the 85mm. I shoot college basketball with an xs. It's a frustrating endeavor. The auto focus is pretty weak. You're going to need the extra stops that you'll get with the 1.2 aperture on that lens, unless you want to shoot at ISO 1600, which is pretty noisy on an xs.

If you do shoot at 1600, the 70-200 would be the best choice.

Good luck!

 

[bottguardo]

You should also consider a EF 100mm F/2. It's a solid, fast lens and it'll give you a little more reach than the 85.

 

[DerekSalem]

I own both of the lenses in your thread title, and I can tell you that the 24-70mm is going to give you crap for performance when shooting the action shots. I would definitely take the 70-200, it is also great for portraits if you can get far enough away.

Wide open, the 24-70 takes a huge hit in sharpness when zoomed to 70mm, which is probably where you'd be shooting at, so I don't think you'd be happy with the results. Plus, the 70-200 has IS, which is perfect for sports (just make sure the IS is on mode 2).

This. I've owned the 24-70 too (usually called the Brick) and didn't care for it for anything but portrait work. I switched to the 24-105 because at higher zooms the 24-70 isn't very sharp at all (relatively, of course). The 70-200 is the highest IQ lens anywhere near that range that Canon makes and it'll work for both events. Truth be told it's better to use more of a telephoto lens anyway even for portraiture because it removes barrel distortion almost completely.

 

[Samaritan]

You have a crop factor body, so maybe think about 17-55 2.8 is canon and 70-200 canon IS. the other two 24-70, 24-105 are ment for FF body.
bye

 

[sovietdoc]

Considering that you can't get close to her, I'd go with 70-200