A&P after doing a lot of reading, i think i've switched from 70-200 2.8 to 4 (IS)

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by ace3, Oct 25, 2007.

  1. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    the 2.8 would definitely be nice, but it's TWICE as heavy as the f4. not that the 2.8 was terribly heavy (i've rented it), but half the weight would be nice.

    i'm not in darker situations all that often, and reviews keep saying how the 2.8 is usually quite a bit softer than the 4.

    :dunno:

    not a whole lot of price saving from the $1475 2.8IS to the $980 4IS.

    anyone else have an opinion? :o
     
  2. Cobber

    Cobber Wanna touch my bunny hole?

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    Messages:
    13,732
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    :canada:
  3. IntheWorks

    IntheWorks windin film.. takin pics Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,928
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    earth
  4. IntheWorks

    IntheWorks windin film.. takin pics Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,928
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    earth

    I haven't ever used the f/4, but I loved the f/2.8... but like you said, if you don't think you'll hardly ever need the benefit of the f/2.8, why waste the money on it... just go with the f/4 and be happy :)
     
  5. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    yeah, i know i want the IS.

    i just hate seeing everyone sell their F/4 and say "i love this lens. the only reason i'm selling it is to go up to the f/2.8!!!"

    makes me want the 2.8! :rofl:
     
  6. Trlstyle

    Trlstyle New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AC-130W
    Ive used both, own one.

    I own the F/4L IS and would prefer it any day over the 2.8. Its heavier than i would prefer and more money...and i dont see myself benefiting too much from "just" one stop. The 2.8 is a TANK.
     
  7. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    hard to go worng with any of them. from some samples of the 4 IS, it may be sharper than the 2.8 IS :noes:
     
  8. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    I finally committed to the 2.8 IS...best thing I have ever done. Save the extra money and do it. f4 is to slow if you ever shoot indoors under artificial light.
     
  9. IntheWorks

    IntheWorks windin film.. takin pics Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,928
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    earth
    I like shooting wide open with the 2.8 even in daylight conditions.. the bokeh is just so creamy smooth.
    [​IMG]
     
  10. Tedrzz

    Tedrzz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,578
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    after alot of READING????

    shouldn't you be TESTING??
     
  11. GregFarz78

    GregFarz78 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Messages:
    64,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    I'm with you I borrowed a friends sigma 70-200 f2.8 and while the f2.8 was nice honestly I don't see myself using it that much...I did love the bokeh though :hs: I think I'll be going with the 70-200 f4 IS too...btw the sigma was a nice lens but I hated the fact no IS. The good news is the resale on those seem to be pretty good you could upgrade later and not lose that much money on the deal
     
  12. SLED

    SLED build an idiot proof device and someone else will

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    28,118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AZ, like a bauce!
    that's exactly how i ended up with the 2.8 :o
     
  13. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    kinda what i've been noticing too.
     
  14. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    i rented the 2.8 once, and the weight didn't bother me ... then i started to think that the weight didn't bother me 'cause it wasn't "MY" lens, and i was just psyched to have such a nice piece of equipment for once.

    i don't think i'd like to carry it around all the time.

    plus, the f4 will fit in my bag a lot better. :o
     
  15. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    ASSHOLES!! :madfawk:
     
  16. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    i don't own a camera :eek3:
     
  17. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    you, sir, aren't helping.
     
  18. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    eggzachary. f4 IS' are going for only a hundred or two cheaper than you can buy one for. that's not bad at all.
     
  19. Trlstyle

    Trlstyle New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AC-130W
    This is what it came down to for me. The size bothered me, and i always have that lens in my bad...so i opted for the F/4. No regrets here, but obviously the choice is yours.
    Exactly why i picked up a new one! "L" glass generally holds a decent resale value. :bigthumb:
     
  20. spizarxxx

    spizarxxx DSLR, GSD, DJ CREW & OT's Resident On Air Personal

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    8,617
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    541/Oregon
    gonna sell your f4?
     
  21. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    long gone
     
  22. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    2.8 crew holla... I could never shoot with a 4.0 or slower lens once owning several faster lenses. Shooting wide open or close to it has saved me from having to shoot at iso 3200

    [​IMG]
    iso 1600, f/3.2, 1/50, IS on - mode 1

    for those complaining about the weight :bateman:
    if my skinny ass can hold up the 2.8 IS and a 1D MKII for 6 hours of panning, you guys shouldn't have any problems.
     
  23. ThexToddster

    ThexToddster New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Woodcrest, CA
    .

    I'm in the same boat you are. Love the 2.8 IS. Not too heavy with the 1D, granted it does get tiring after a long day of shooting, but it's well worth it.

    If it's too heavy, go lift some weights sissy boy. :mamoru:
     
  24. CRC

    CRC New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    14,893
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    PDX
    Why do people make such an issue about this? It's not that heavy.

    But when you are you'll be kicking yourself
    Measurebaters.


    You buy cheap, you buy twice. If you are ever in need of cash, L glass can be sold for majority of what you paid
     
  25. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    ^^ damn you!

    we'll see what happens. now i'm not sure. :o
     

Share This Page