A&P If i get the 70-200 F4 am I going to wish i got the 2.8?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Creator, Jul 23, 2008.

  1. Creator

    Creator The Creator Has a Master Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,092
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Here
    I think its time to step up to a big boy and since I dont have to buy pocket wizards now seems to be a good time. Looks like the F4's are half the price of the 2.8s.

    I shoot portrait and live music. F4 for portrait is fine but for music probably not so much. I'm conflicted. Anyone own both?
     
  2. xenon supra

    xenon supra OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    33,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    2.8 or bust
     
  3. IntheWorks

    IntheWorks windin film.. takin pics Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,928
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    earth
    go 2.8 or go home... you'll even want to use 2.8 for portraits.
     
  4. mtkversion

    mtkversion Good Times Aplenty

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2000
    Messages:
    7,528
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California
    If you're shooting in clubs/bars more I'd get the f/2.8 unless all your venues allow flash photography.
     
  5. 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!
    2.8 is sexy
     
  6. W.Shatner

    W.Shatner New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    I find 2.8 is to slow for most concert stuff still. So f/4 isn't what you'd want for band or concert photography.
     
  7. Creator

    Creator The Creator Has a Master Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,092
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Here
    Ok what about the 2.8 without IS?
     
  8. NOR*CAL

    NOR*CAL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    17,600
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Hella
    F4 kinda useless in low light. BUT for outdoor portraits, it's truely amazing.

    [​IMG]

    pelf, yes.. straight off card.
     
  9. Creator

    Creator The Creator Has a Master Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,092
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Here
    Id have to get a new bag if i get this lens too fuck.
     
  10. aCab

    aCab New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicaaago
    If you get the f/4 you're always going to wish you had the f/2.8 IS.
     
  11. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    I had this exact thread in May. and acab is correct and if you get teh non IS you will always wish you got the IS version

    I ended up getting the 2.8 IS. I really did nto want to. But my only reason for not wanting to was cost. Everything else about it made me want it. I have no regrets with it. Be warned - it is a monster
     
  12. Creator

    Creator The Creator Has a Master Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,092
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Here
    I dont have IS with any of my other lenses ... does it really make that much of a difference? I found a used non is for like $700.
     
  13. aCab

    aCab New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicaaago
    It makes a big difference on a telephoto. I said the same thing - I had a 70-200 f/4 and always wished I had a f/2.8 IS - and guess what? It's the next lens that I'm going to buy. IS on an "L" series telephoto is good for about 3-4 stops.
     
  14. Jcolman

    Jcolman OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    43,114
    Likes Received:
    82
    Location:
    east coast
    I'm thinking of selling my 70-200 f/2.8 IS and picking up the 200 f/2.8L prime instead. Then buy something else with the extra $1000 or so I'll have left over.
     
  15. Creator

    Creator The Creator Has a Master Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,092
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Here
    Maybe I should just save my money for this short film
     
  16. W.Shatner

    W.Shatner New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    It's what I have and I shoot nothing but primes. DO IT!
     
  17. MSIGuy

    MSIGuy om nom nom nom!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    4,724
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pretty much.
     
  18. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    Get the 2.8 IS, for what you shoot, you will want/need it.

    for an IS vs no IS comparison, with my 100-400L IS turned off, I need to shoot at 1/400th (at 400mm) nice sharp picture with no camera shake (its hit an miss at 1/320). with IS on, I can shoot at 1/60th of a second at 400mm
     
  19. Creator

    Creator The Creator Has a Master Plan

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    44,092
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Here
    Fuck beans
     
  20. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    at least there will always be a demand if you want to sell it because 2.8 is too fast and un-needed
     
  21. SonicYan

    SonicYan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    10,259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I wish I had the 2.8 version. :wtc:
     
  22. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,407
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Houston
    I'm glad nikon doesn't give us that choice. :)

    I'm sure if you're doing outside photography, the f/4 would be fine. Inside, the f/2.8 would be fine. But if you want to have the all arounder, 2.8 IS it is. :o
     
  23. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Yes, you'll regret it ... period.

    /thread
     
  24. SLIGHTLY

    SLIGHTLY OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bay Area
    :noes:the f4 is sharper...
     
  25. Gvidon

    Gvidon New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    16,893
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    For what you do, you need the 2.8

    And never question about getting IS on a 200 lens.
     

Share This Page