A&P Which Telephoto Zoom Lens Does OTAP Recommend?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by PUREVIL, Jun 24, 2008.

  1. PUREVIL

    PUREVIL More Money Than Brains Croo

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    22,622
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Minot ND / Las Vegas NV
    Im kinda stuck between the Canon 70-200 F2.8 or the 100-400 F4.5

    Obvsiously the 400 will have more zoom, but the f2.8 will better in lower light right? Im kinda leaning towards the 400, but i'd like the experienced peoples opinions, thanks!
     
  2. nine

    nine OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    16,286
    Likes Received:
    36
    Location:
    so. cal.
    what are you taking pictures of?
     
  3. Sympathy

    Sympathy OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2006
    Messages:
    31,025
    Likes Received:
    81
    i'd go for the 2.8.
    i realized 4.5 isn't sometimes enough when you're shooting on really cloudy days.
     
  4. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    70 200 and a tc when you need more reach. You'll be able to use the 70 200 indoors; the 100 400 it'll be tough. Plus, more background blur with the 2.8
     
  5. aCab

    aCab New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicaaago
    70-200 f/2.8 IS Hands Down.
     
  6. widds2v

    widds2v Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    18,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Coronado, CA
    Between the 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS and the 70-200 f/4 IS which would you recommend for generally outdoor photos... landscapes, buildings, general "tourist" type photos. Tripod probably will almost never be used.
     
  7. aCab

    aCab New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicaaago
    I'd get the f/4 IS. If you can swing it, its worth it (IMO) to get the 2.8 IS
     
  8. widds2v

    widds2v Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    18,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Coronado, CA
    I can't justify the $500+ difference though just for IS on the 2.8. The 2.8 non-IS and the 4 IS are about the same price so I can swing it either way.

    I dunno, maybe I'll win the lottery. First lens I need to get anyways is the Tamron 28-75, although I'm tempted to pick up the 70-200 before the 30th because I'd get 35% off of it with the microsoft credit & my 10% coupon.
     
  9. aCab

    aCab New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicaaago
    So with your discount, wouldn't that $500 difference be a lot less? If you're in it for the long run, the 2.8 IS is the better way to go. If you've never shot with IS, then you don't realize just how valuable it is. Especially on a telephoto. Shorter lenses it doesn't matter as much, but on a telephoto it makes a huge difference. When you start shooting at f/4, you'll want more. I know I did. IS is just the icing on the cake. So use your 45% off coupon and buy the lens that everybody wants for much much less. If you end up needing money, just turn around and sell the thing for profit.
     
  10. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    but if you want to travel the f4IS smaller, lighter and easier to wield.
     
  11. xenon supra

    xenon supra OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    33,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    f/2.8 no doubt
     
  12. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,424
    Likes Received:
    109
    Location:
    Houston
    70-200 IS f/2.8 all day
     
  13. PUREVIL

    PUREVIL More Money Than Brains Croo

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    22,622
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Minot ND / Las Vegas NV
    Well my initial thoughts were using it at the lake to take pics of friends and kids wakeboarding/tubing and then maybe some auto x and other motorsports.

    Canon EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 Image Stabilizer USM Lens - $1347

    Canon EF 70-200mm F/2.8L USM IS Lens - $1569

    These are the two lens im comparing, IMO there isn't a huge price difference at this point. Sounds like the 70-200 is the clear winnar here. Thanks OTAP.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2008
  14. widds2v

    widds2v Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    18,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Coronado, CA
    Remember search live.com for something like "nunchuk", click the link up top that says "save 25% off nunchucks on ebay" and then search for canon 70-200 2.8 is. Instant 25% off the buy it now price.
     
  15. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    I would be absolutely lost in photography if I did not have my 2.8 L IS. I love that lens and glad I saved the bread and got it. I think we have all done the f4 IS vs non-IS f2.8 vs save money and get the 2.8/IS, but really all you're doing is trying to convince yourself that 70-200 f2.8 L IS is not the best so you feel okay not buying, but it is hands down. Save up and buy it and you'll never be let down or second guessing your decision.
     
  16. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    For what you listed, go with the 100-400. Anyone saying its too slow doesnt know where their ISO button is. Its probably the most versatile sporting lens out there. The only thing it cant do that the 70-200 can is indoor sports.
     
  17. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    as an owner of the 100-400 I'd say go 70-200 2.8 and when you need the reach add the 2x tele

    the quality at 400mm won't quite be the same, but on the flip side you'll have a 70-200 2.8 lens

    I wish I would have gone that route instead of the 100-400 :hs:
     
  18. PUREVIL

    PUREVIL More Money Than Brains Croo

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    22,622
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Minot ND / Las Vegas NV
    I guess originally I was using the old bigger is better mentality. Thinking hey if I can get an extra 200 mm for a lil cheaper than why not? But i know that having a larger ap is also an important quality, maybe more important so thats why I asked OTAPs opinion. So I think i'll just get the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, it wasn't a question of money really for me, thats why I work 12 to 14 hrs a day, 6 days a week! It was a question of more useable zoom range, does that make sense?
     
  19. ThexToddster

    ThexToddster New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Woodcrest, CA
    70-200 2.8L IS and a 1.4 and you'll be set. I have that and I love it.
     
  20. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Werd. Well good luck on your purchase. Post up some results ... assuming you have time to shoot. :hsd:
     
  21. PUREVIL

    PUREVIL More Money Than Brains Croo

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    22,622
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Minot ND / Las Vegas NV
    I usually shoot on sundays after I clean house. I still suck though. I'll probably order that lens later this week. I always say im going to put it off buying shit but then I usually order it that day. LOL
     
  22. SugarCoatedSour

    SugarCoatedSour Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    53,663
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Glenview, IL
    70-200 f/2.8 is the answer to all life's problems.
     
  23. feetball

    feetball New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    11,766
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Shreddin' tha Perd!
    I know a pro guy who shoots a lot of wakeboarding. He said he almost never takes his 70-200 f/2.8 off the body when he's on the boat.
     
  24. PEnGUiN188

    PEnGUiN188 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    5,835
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    70-200 f/2.8 IS is such a epic lens
     
  25. PUREVIL

    PUREVIL More Money Than Brains Croo

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    22,622
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Minot ND / Las Vegas NV
    Sweet... Im sold, I just gotta find a good price now. Anyone know of any hot deals?
     

Share This Page