Just noticed a good deal for the new model. I'm certainly not unhappy with the current model, its everything a lens should be (for me).
 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 1
Just noticed a good deal for the new model. I'm certainly not unhappy with the current model, its everything a lens should be (for me).
What's the deal on the new model? I'm considering an upgrade to that or going to a 100-400 (for more reach on full frame).
I should also add, what do you use the lens for? If you need the IS for low light slow shutter speed it is definitely worth it, if you don't need that then the justification needs to be based on image quality which may be harder to justify.
Last edited by etherial; 25-06-2012 at 9:09pm.
Threadstarter
DWI have it for $2098
Probably less low light use than action shooting - but I'm sure the IS would come in handy
70mm at high ISO and slow shutter speed 200mm at higher ISO and slow shutter speed, are you using the right lens?
What do you shoot that you need a tele at slow shutter speeds and such low light?
If your cashed up and want it because, well go for it, It won't matter what we type here then, will it !!!!
They call me "Blue" it's a red head thing.
"My Flickr Site"
Canon Bodies - 1DMk2N + 50D - Lenses - 17-35mm F2.8 L - 24-70mm F2.8 L - 70-200mm F2.8 L - 300mm F4 IS L - Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 - Sigma 10-20mm - DJI Mavic Pro Platinum
" I Never get tired of looking at our diverse country, even if its through the lens of someone else".
CC is always appreciated.
Anything over 100mm is a lot better with IS, especially in low light.
All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.
Telephoto in low light, high ISO and slow shutter speed has an obvious use: stalking!!
Do you stalk people or do you stalk wildlife?
IS is certainly worth the extra money. I tried shooting handheld with the 100-400 with IS switched off and could not get a decent shot under the 1/focal length.... But with the IS on I could get usable results at about 1/4 to 1/3 of these shutterspeeds.
A 70-200 is a good in between lens for "reporting" on a full frame without the need to switch lenses all the time. I have the 24-105 and the 100-400 and wished I had the 70-200 as well - especially for "city" work where you dont need wide angle ad don;t need super tele....
I'll have to save a little bit longer.
I have the is version and find it invaluable for low speed panning and low light shooting.
Keith.
Keith
Canon 400D Gripped, Canon 7D LCD Timer Gripped, Canon 70-200 f2.8L is ii. Canon 2X iii Extender, Canon 50mm 1.8, Sigma 150-500, Sigma 18-250, Sigma 17-50 F2.8, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 90mm Macro, Yonguno YN460 & 460ii Speedlights and a Hanimax TZ 1 Flash, Wireless Triggers ,LED Macro Ringlight, Extension Tubes, 3 tripods, 2 monopods, PS Elements 5 & 10, PSP9 and canon s/ware, various filters and other photographic paraphernalia all packed in a computrecker backpack. NEW:- Panasonic GX8, 45-150, 14mm F2.5. PSE 2018.
Threadstarter
Thanks for the responses (even the slightly aggressive one)
I decided it was too hard for me to justify
its worth the upgrade..i can t photograph for xxxx but have top photos with the 70-200 l lens is 11
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Add To Bookmarks
