A&P need help picking a new lens ..... 70-200 f/4 IS or 70-200 f/2.8?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by RoudyruffKK, Jul 21, 2009.

  1. RoudyruffKK

    RoudyruffKK OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    55,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seal Beach, CA
    okay i got some funds in my paypal account and i have 2 lenses on my list, the one i'm going to get for sure is the 24-70L and for the basic telephoto lens i'm looking at a 70-200 but can't decide which variation.

    both the 70-200 f/4 IS and the 70-200 f/2.8 are about the same price at around $1000 and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is a bit more expensive at around $1400 which is doable but i still have to sell my 28mm f/1.8 first. basically what i'm wondering which would be better IS or that extra stop
     
  2. NOR*CAL

    NOR*CAL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    17,610
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Hella
    I rather get a 2.8 cause of the bokeh and cause it's fast.
     
  3. RoudyruffKK

    RoudyruffKK OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    55,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seal Beach, CA
    does it make a difference if i say i won't be using a tripod most of the time? when i've played with my 28-135 i've found when i'm all the way in the 135 range my hands do shake a bit :o
     
  4. NOR*CAL

    NOR*CAL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    17,610
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Hella
    Rule of thumb is 1/whatever focal length as a minimum shutter speed.

    It mainly depends on what you're shooting.
     
  5. RoudyruffKK

    RoudyruffKK OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    55,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seal Beach, CA
    people/candids .... i tried bird shooting but found that following birds to shoot isn't my thing :o

    on that note i went to the park saturday where there's alot of geese and apparently when you walk toward them, even slowly and non-threatening, they still run away :rofl: ..... i tried following them with a 10-22 :rofl:
     
  6. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,419
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Houston
    2.8 IS if you can swing it.
     
  7. NOR*CAL

    NOR*CAL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    17,610
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Hella
    Well, the great thing about either lens, is that if you don't like it, you can always straight trade or sell it to buy the other :).
     
  8. RoudyruffKK

    RoudyruffKK OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    55,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seal Beach, CA
    i can since i'm hoping to get $375 for the 28 f/1.8 .... i figure i'll have about $2400 for 2 lenses and the 24-70 will set me back about $1000 but honestly is it really going to make THAT much of a difference with the 70-200 f/2.8 vs the IS version?
     
  9. RoudyruffKK

    RoudyruffKK OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    55,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seal Beach, CA
    after playing with the prime i like it and hate it, i love how awesome the pictures come out in low light because of the high aperature but feet zoom ftl :hs:
     
  10. mikeskillz

    mikeskillz New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    5,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    70-200 f/4 IS.

    if it were my money, thats what i'd get. even if i had the funds for the 2.8 IS.
     
  11. RoudyruffKK

    RoudyruffKK OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    55,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seal Beach, CA
    i've heard the 2.8IS is twice as heavy as the others :rofl:
     
  12. White Stormy

    White Stormy Take that, subspace!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    85,489
    Likes Received:
    70
    Location:
    Sparkopolis
    I have the 70-200/4L..

    I haven't used the 2.8L, but there have been plenty of situations where I wished I had the larger aperture and the weather sealing

    2.8L IS is definitely in my future

    the 4L is lightning quick, though, and crazy sharp
     
  13. wrong1

    wrong1 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,363
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    socal
    If you have ANY doubts about your steady hands I say go for the IS be it the 2.8 or the f4. I recently had the same debate only on the nikon side of the fents, 80-200 2.8 vs 70-200 2.8vr. I went for the vr due to my shaky hands, and I do not regret it one bit. You can have the sharpest lens in the world but if you cant hold it steady it wont be any better than a $100 quantaray...
     
  14. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Don't fuck around. The 70-200 f2.8 L IS (or Nikon's equivalent) is the only lens every serious photographer should own. Period. Ultra wide, wide and primes are up for debate, but without the 70-200 f2.8 your arsenal will never be complete.
     
  15. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,721
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    IS can make a pretty big difference at 200mm
    It certainly isn't light.
     
  16. alexromo

    alexromo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wahiawa
    this
     
  17. Perkwunos

    Perkwunos Dog Bones OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2004
    Messages:
    10,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Abu Dhabi, UAE
    I found the IS allowing me tot take shots at below 1/200, maybee down to 1/50 and still get something sharp and usable...:bigthumb:
     
  18. someonenew

    someonenew He's Dangerous

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    104,681
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    the 2.8/IS would be the best bet...it will last the longest, I know you're just starting out and this lense will probably go with you longer than anything else.
     
  19. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    The 2.8 is good for 2 things

    1) taking pictures that you need this kind of reach indoors.

    2) the bokeh it gives when taking pics outside

    i had the 2.8 IS and traded for the f4 IS
     
  20. Ty Webb

    Ty Webb You don't have to go to college. This isn't Russia

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    10,927
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bushwood Country Club
    I sold my f/4 IS for the 2.8 non IS.
     
  21. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,419
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Houston
    If you buy what you really want the first time around, you won't spend your time wondering 'what if...'

    I learned that over the last 2 years, and if I can't afford it, I just don't get it until I can. :o
     
  22. someonenew

    someonenew He's Dangerous

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    104,681
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    :werd:

    don't settle for subpar equipment. You'll only put off the big purchase longer, and you'll hate yourself for not having what you want.
     
  23. Hyperite

    Hyperite Vagina Junction OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Messages:
    28,531
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    70-200 f/2.8 IS is on my list... but right now I'm rockin the EF-S 55-250 f/4.0-5.6 IS :hsd:
     
  24. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,632
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    rented all 3 (f4 IS, 2.8, 2.8IS), and ended up buying the f4 IS.

    the one extra stop didn't do much for me, really.

    the size/weight of the 2.8IS over the other one was quite a bit.

    some say the 4 is sharper than the 2.8.

    the IS sure comes in handy
     
  25. guest

    guest 

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2000
    Messages:
    51,370
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    san francisco bay Reputation: 25
    I just bought the f/2.8 IS. It was $1298 brand new so I couldn't pass it up :o

    It isn't nearly has heavy as what people make it seem.
     

Share This Page