A&P Convince me to get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and 400 f/5.6

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by QWIKSNK, Jul 3, 2008.

  1. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    Its going to be time to get another new (to me) lens soon

    I was originally going to get the 100-400 IS f/4.5 BUT, my fastest now is f/4 (well ok, i have a nifty fifty too), and Im thinking I need something faster, and sharp wide open so I can actually use it wide open.

    I think I would get a lot more use out of something I can use in low light (I don't do any low light shooting now, and there are many times I wish I could)

    I really want something with 400mm of reach too, my 70-300 is nice, but I wish I had more sometimes (I also have the 1.4x TC, but in order to get sharp shots I have to shoot at f/8-f/11, which means I still need to use ISO 1600 even on sunny days)

    I wont be able to buy both at once, but I could sell the 70-300 and get a 2x TC to tide me over till I can get the 400 too (then I can use the 2x with the 400 :naughty: )

    I know its the right decision, but will cost me a lot more than just getting the 100-400
     
  2. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    sigma 120-300 f/2.8 + 1.4x and/or 2x :hsughno:

    70-200 + 400 is great combo though, but don't work with tele converters very well if at all.
     
  3. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    a couple of my 400 5.6 shots

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    70-200 goes with out saying that its amazing. By FAR my most used lens.
     
  4. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    are you just talking about the AF?

    I dont really mind MF when I am using my TC now, I dont use it that often, but it comes in handy at times (I also have the tamron version, which does AF with slower lenses)

    awesome shots, where those taken wide open?
     
  5. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    try that with an f/11 lens though :mamoru:

    the viewfinder will be so dim you won't be able to see shit.
     
  6. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    Im not looking for anything spectacular with a TC, I know they have a lot of drawbacks, 99% of the time both lenses will be used without a TC. But they are nice to have in the bag

    I don't notice my viewfinder getting much dimmer with my 1.4x TC. Im still young and have good eyes ;), I'll deal.

    Im more interested in performance without the TC.
     
  7. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    whoa, I just realized the sigma 120-300 is $2500 ($2200 used)

    For that price I can get the 70-200 ($1575 new, only one I found used was $1500, so ill buy new) and the 400 5.6 (found one used for $825 locally) and have a lot more range
     
  8. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    except nothing between 200 and 400 :hs:

    a 1.4x is handy to get you to 400 f/4, and having a 300 2.8 in the bag with zoom isn't a bad thing.

    Either way is a can't lose, just depends on what you want.
     
  9. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    you are right about that.

    with my current 70-300, im either at 70mm, 180-200mm, or 300mm and wishing it was longer.

    plus, I cant afford to drop $2500 at once, Im going to get the 70-200 first, and eventually get the 400.


    Edit: I just read a bunch of reviews for the 120-300, a lot of them say it is soft at 2.8, one said they did a test with a 300mm 2.8 prime, and the sigma was not really 300 mm, but more like 240 mm. For that kind of coin, I dont want to risk getting a bad copy
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2008
  10. alexromo

    alexromo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wahiawa
    what do you do with photography?

    hobby=dont get it unless you can really afford it

    full time job=get it, no questions asked

    70-200mmf2.8 is my favorite lens, i love taking candid shots at weddings, 8 out of 10 of them on their album are all candid
     
  11. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Well, start with the 70-200 f2.8. I don't care if you're a Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony or Lolympus user, everyone who is even semi interested in photography should own one. Once you get used to that and realize that 200mm is not very much, THEN look into a 300, 400, 500 etc. And on a side note, buy glass, not extenders.
     
  12. turbodude

    turbodude Just a photographer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    10,118
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    i just did that.... i get it today muahahahaha. :) 1500 shipped for the 120-300 2.8. i got a steal.
     
  13. TomDlgns

    TomDlgns OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Messages:
    60,944
    Likes Received:
    329

Share This Page