What 2 lenses to have?

[EOS_JD]

How big of a deal is the IS on a lens?
$ is always an issue, but I could save for a year or sell one of my kids.

Large aperture will increase your opportunities for shots especially for moving subjects. However with IS think of being able to shoot at 200mm (or longer) and three stops slower a shutter speed than normal. that's a shutter speed of 1/25th sec at 200mm!!!! Sharp great images. If you shopt still subjects the IS is the lens to get.

Shooting a wedding or other event, you can handhold this lens at around 1/30th and faster and get amazingly sharp images at 200mm!!! It's an outstanding lens that is well worth the extra over the non-IS. However if it's down to cash only you can decide if you want to pay the extra. IS is worth every penny and I now have 3 IS lenses.....

 

[EOS_JD]

Also, do you think that 70-200 f/2.8 is worth the extra time to save up $ for over the 70-200 f/4. weight, size, and $ ???

I started with the f4L but in lowing light shooting at 200mm, it's difficult to maintain that 1/200th sec to get sharp images. the f2.8 is a whole stop faster and that makes a big difference.

the weight is not a big issue for me and I'm no Arnold Schwarzenegger.

 

[table1349]

Large aperture will increase your opportunities for shots especially for moving subjects. However with IS think of being able to shoot at 200mm (or longer) and three stops slower a shutter speed than normal. that's a shutter speed of 1/25th sec at 200mm!!!! Sharp great images. If you shopt still subjects the IS is the lens to get.

Shooting a wedding or other event, you can handhold this lens at around 1/30th and faster and get amazingly sharp images at 200mm!!! It's an outstanding lens that is well worth the extra over the non-IS. However if it's down to cash only you can decide if you want to pay the extra. IS is worth every penny and I now have 3 IS lenses.....

The OP needs to keep in mind however that this only holds true for slow moving or static subjects. IS is virtually useless when shooting something like sports. Freezing action comes from higher shutter speeds and IS will not be of value unless used when panning. Even with panning a high shutter speed is needed to freeze the subject. The OP needes to decide if IS is of use to them for what they plan to shoot.

 

[flyrccg]

What about a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 APO EX DC HSM. Any experiance with this lens. It can be bought for < $700.00.
Or a Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM for < $900.00

 

[table1349]

What about a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 APO EX DC HSM. Any experiance with this lens. It can be bought for < $700.00.
Or a Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM for < $900.00

I can't talk about the 50-150 but my local photography shop got the 70-200 sigma to provide something between the Canon 70-200 f4 and 70-200 f2.8 in price. The owner let me shoot it and from the little bit of time I played with it I was impressed. I only shot it for about 15 or 20 minutes though, so it was not a real comprehensive test. I shot outdoors on a sunny day. AF was quick and seemed accurate. IQ was quite nice as well. Looked like an interesting lens.

 

[Don Simon]

The 70-200mm f/2.8 is an excellent lens - I am waiting for one for my mount. The 50-150 is designed as the "equivalent" for small sensors so I expect it too will be a good performer and well built.

 

[flyrccg]

OK, I think I will get one of these. What are your thoughts?
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM w/Image Stabilizer $1200.00
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM w/o Image Stabilizer $1200.00
Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM $900.00

 

[table1349]

OK, I think I will get one of these. What are your thoughts?
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM w/Image Stabilizer $1200.00
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM w/o Image Stabilizer $1200.00
Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM $900.00

Chris,
They all seem to be steller performers in their own right. I have owned both a 70-200 f4L and now the 70-200 f2.8L. Neither were IS as I find that I just don't need it. I was quite impressed with the Sigma that I shot and as luck would have it I happened to run into the purchaser of that exact lens today at my local photography shop and he loves it.

I think the decision for you comes down to three things in which ever order is right for you. They are:
1. Do you need IS or not? You know what you are going to shoot. f.2.8 faster glass for low light. f4, IS.
2. Canon or Sigma. If the choice was solely based on the 2 f2.8's above mine would be the Canon. That is just me.
3. Price. $300 would get you other accessories, tripod, monopod, a 50mm f1.8 or some other glass.

Maybe someone else has other things they would add to the list, but I think in the longrun you need to weigh the different options and recomendations and choose which will make you the happiest.

 

[flyrccg]

Do find the weight of the 2.8 to be a little much? This will be the lens that I will use when I need more than 50mm, Probably 1/2 of the time.

 

[dinodan]

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8

Nikkor 55-200 f/4-5.6 IF-ED VR

 

[MikeR]

Do find the weight of the 2.8 to be a little much? This will be the lens that I will use when I need more than 50mm, Probably 1/2 of the time.

It is heavy, just get a comfortable,wide ,PADDED strap.

 

[table1349]

No, I've been shooting 30+ years. I guess I don't notice it. But then I remember shooting with steel body cameras that were bigger in size with all metal and glass lenses on monopods that were not much more that pipes. I get older and camera gear gets lighter every year.

I think with good technique you will learn to control the weight. A grip helps alot for me as it is more to get my right hand around and my left hand under. It's heavier to lug around you neck, but at the top of the page you will see an add for IMO the best camera strap made for handling weight. And cheap too. Plus it's got a nifty logo on it.

If you have a photo shop close go play with the f2.8 and the f4IS. The 2.8 is only a pound heavier than the f4 IS.


OK FINE. I mention the Optech Strap with The Photo Forum logo on it, and the add isn't at the top of the page.

OK, I go to another section and the add is at the top of the page. So here it is. I knew there was an OpTech strap on here.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/tpfstraps/index.html

 

[AUZambo]

I would get the 10-2000mm f1-f1.5 IS lens.

Let me know if you can find it...I've been looking forever, but to no avail.

 

[flyrccg]

I would get the 10-2000mm f1-f1.5 IS lens.

Let me know if you can find it...I've been looking forever, but to no avail.

Those are really nice. Canon had them for $150.00 for limited time. There gone now. No more for a few years, and the price is going to be a little higher.

 

[usayit]

As a portrait lens, you can't beat the two very commonly used wedding zooms in the Canon lineup:

24-70mm f2.8L
70-200mm f2.8L (IS or non-IS).

Unless you are planning to do a lot of walking around and hiking, I wouldn't hesitate on the Canon 70-200mm f2.8. It takes wonderful photos albeit a bit too heavy as a "walk around" lens.

On the flip side.... Unless you are doing this for a living or have $$$ to burn, I think the money is best spent on the Sigma (which is a good lens as well). For a hobbiest or someone learning, the price difference is best spent elsewhere. For example, a couple f1.4 or f1.8 primes for those low light shooters (I fall in this category).... or money towards a set of strobes/lights, flashes, backdrops, etc... There's more to portraits than just a good lens.

BTW... My cousin does portraits for his kids' sports teams with the 70-200mm f4L out in daylight. Wonderfully sharp compact lens.