DILEMMA !!

Ptyler22 · Feb 2, 2009

I am having a dilemma. I don't know whether I should buy an external flash, or a 70-200mm F2.8. I shoot mostly sports, some indoor and some outdoor. I have just started shooting for a local paper and may start expanding my horizons, and start shooting some other types of stuff, like people at meetings and celebrations and such. I am not sure which I will get more use from. I realize the 70-200 costs a bit more, but I want it more, I don't have a lot of money, so at this point I just want which ever would be a more useful piece of equipment at this point. I have plenty for a 70-200, but I don't want to "waste" it one something I'm not really going to need a lot.

Any advice on which one I should buy wold be super useful. Thanks

Overread · Feb 2, 2009

amm 70-200mm f2.8 is a fast lens alright and I do see it used for sports - its not as popular as some of the longer options (300mm f2.8 - 400mm - 500 - 600mm) but I belive its a solid choice in a lens.
It would also give you extra and faster reach over yor 28-135mm. I would say go for the lens - its the more expensive item and you can save for the flash after - go for glass

Katier · Feb 2, 2009

Heck you can get perfectly useable flashes second hand ( just be carefull they are compatible with your camera - and check ALL flashes, even if your buying one from the same manufactuer ) for very little money. So I agree lens and if you fancy a flash get a second hand one.

tsaraleksi · Feb 2, 2009

For sports the 70-200 is a great starting lens, and it's a versatile and indispensable lens in any shooter's kit.

Samanax · Feb 2, 2009

I think you would make better use of a faster lens than a flash at this point. Get the flash later.

Mgw189 · Feb 2, 2009

Got to agree with everyone else. Not to mention the longest range you have right now is 135mm so the extra range will help you as well.

Ptyler22 · Feb 2, 2009

Definitely sounds like the 70-200 is my best bet. Now my only problem is that the woman who is the main photographer for the newspaper, and the editor, told me that the next thing I should get is a flash. This was like right when she saw what gear I had, she said, "you need a flash next". I didn't ask her "what about a 70-200?" or anything, so it's not like she specifically told me I need a flash and not the 2.8. But I feel bad going against what she said I should get, but I also realllllly have been wanting a 70-200mm for a while, and don't want to go against what you guys said. So I am thrilled that the 70-200mm will be useful for me, but it might be kinda awkward when she sees my new lens and no flash. Maybe I'll get a cheapo flash or something. It's kinda one of those :thumbup::thumbdown: situations.

Mgw189 · Feb 2, 2009

Check out some used flashes and get the lens.

Samanax · Feb 2, 2009

Ptyler22 said:
Maybe I'll get a cheapo flash or something.

Not sure what you consider cheap, but Cameta Camera has the Canon 430EX for $190, brand new. I ordered 2 the other day to add to my strobist gear.

Overread · Feb 2, 2009

Well the new lens is very expensive - as is most of the longer fast lenses - she most likley suggested the flash because it would be a cheaper (in the camera world) addon that would enhance your current setup - seeing as how your current long lens (the 28-135 is f5.6 as its max aperture at the long end) is a slower lens.

I think if you talk with her and say that you have the money for something like the 70-200mm f2.8 lens then chances are she will say go for that lens - the only other lens in that price range she might mention is a 300mm f4 - not as fast and needing a flash (though as the 300m is less than the 70-200 you should be able to budget for a flash like a 430).
Talk it over with her and see what she says - remember also that - at the end of the day - its you using the kit not her or us, so you also have to be happy with what you have to use or you won't get results

Ptyler22 · Feb 3, 2009

I see what you mean Overread. I plan on getting a used 70-200, so I should try to get one for around $800 if possible and then a used flash, like one of the Sigmas, that are decent flashes but the build quality drops the price. Hopefully I can get both for under $900.

Jaszek · Feb 3, 2009

Well if you want the 70-200 with IS good luck for getting it for about $800. non-IS, maybe. I just got my 70-200 IS used for $1475, which, if you add on the tax, is $300 cheaper than a new one.

gsgary · Feb 3, 2009

Ptyler22 said:
Definitely sounds like the 70-200 is my best bet. Now my only problem is that the woman who is the main photographer for the newspaper, and the editor, told me that the next thing I should get is a flash. This was like right when she saw what gear I had, she said, "you need a flash next". I didn't ask her "what about a 70-200?" or anything, so it's not like she specifically told me I need a flash and not the 2.8. But I feel bad going against what she said I should get, but I also realllllly have been wanting a 70-200mm for a while, and don't want to go against what you guys said. So I am thrilled that the 70-200mm will be useful for me, but it might be kinda awkward when she sees my new lens and no flash. Maybe I'll get a cheapo flash or something. It's kinda one of those :thumbup::thumbdown: situations.

It's your money not her's, if they send you to shoot sports you have no chance with the lenses you have

Ptyler22 · Feb 3, 2009

Jaszek said:
Well if you want the 70-200 with IS good luck for getting it for about $800. non-IS, maybe. I just got my 70-200 IS used for $1475, which, if you add on the tax, is $300 cheaper than a new one.

Ya, I would never try to get an IS version for $800, and if you could find one for that, it's probably broken in half. I have seen a few for $800 on the FM forums right now.