70-200 f2.8 IS (Ver 1) used or 70-300 F4-5.6 IS L New

[seasamshoot]

I just bought the new 70D which has been great. Im looking for a tele zoom for sports and for portraits and trying to decide with getting a used ver 1 of the 70-200 F2.8 or a new 70-300 L. I like shooting surfing, basketball, water polo and water skiing for sports. Portraits would mostly be outside, with the occasional inside shoot for a family event.

What experience have any of you guys had?

If I was to buy a used lens, is there something I should be looking for other than imperfections on the elements?

Thanks.

Sam

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Go for the original 70-200mm f/2.8L non IS if you want better IQ than the IS version. I had five of the 70-200mm IS versions, all of them are a tad soft as you get towards 200mm, and they are poor with a TC. The version II is a huge improvement in every way.

If you don't need f/2.8, the 70-300L is said to be excellent, but I've never owned one.

Another excellent choice is the 70-200mm f/4 IS. Its excellent all the way even with a TC.

 

[mwh1964]

Really, it depends if you need the speed of the lens vs the focal length. The 70-300L is in every aspect a very very good lens and would be a 480mm on your 70D. The 70-200 L is II is 2 stops better and a lot heavier and you would need a 1.4 TC to get the reach. I have both lenses and I really enjoy using both but for different purposes. No matter what you choose you really cannot go wrong. Best of luck.

 

[ishdakuteb]

i have not used the 70-300mm; therefore, i can not comment on that. however, i would rather get a new 70-200 f/4 IS instead of a used 70-200mm f/2.8 IS version 1 (about the same price)

 

[Random Orbits]

70-300L works really well outdoors, but if you go that route, then you might want to supplement it with a 85 f/1.8 or 100 f/2 or 135L for portraiture/indoor usage.

When buying used, check the corner for equal sharpness (centering), IS on/off if has IS, clean glass, etc. Shoot it open and stopped down. Do the rings work well, etc.

 

[Loswr]

An f/4-5.6 lens on APS-C is not ideal for portraits, or for indoor sports. You might consider something like the 85/1.8 for portraits, and/or the 100/2 or 135/2L for indoor sports. If you need a zoom, I agree with Mt. Spokane that the 70-200/2.8 non-IS delivers better IQ than the IS MkI (the MkII is the best of the 70-200/2.8's by far, but expensive). The 70-300L is fine for sports in good light (sunshine).

 

[seasamshoot]

Thanks for all the advice.

How valuable is the IS on the Mark I? And is the F4 IS good for indoor portraits on a crop camera? Logic would suggest that it would basically be giving me a f5.6 depth of field wide open on the 70D. is that correct?

Thanks again.

 

[ECRoyce]

-snip-
And is the F4 IS good for indoor portraits on a crop camera? Logic would suggest that it would basically be giving me a f5.6 depth of field wide open on the 70D. is that correct?

A full to 4/3 a stop is what I've typically seen in comparably-framed shots on a FF and 1.6 crop, at various apertures. So 5.6-6.3 would be my guess.

 

[Jerome]

I agree with Mt. Spokane and Neuro. You should definitely consider the 70-200mm NON-IS. It's the second lens I bought (after the nifty fifty) and it's had been my most used lens by far since I got it. I have used it to shoot many sporting event (indoors and outdoors) and image are beautiful. The image quality is superb and IS is not necessary for shooting sport since you are using high shutter speed to freeze the action. 70-200mm NON-IS is the best lenses for the money for sport photography.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Thanks for all the advice.

How valuable is the IS on the Mark I? And is the F4 IS good for indoor portraits on a crop camera? Logic would suggest that it would basically be giving me a f5.6 depth of field wide open on the 70D. is that correct?

Thanks again.

I'd recommend a 85mm prime for portraits rather than a zoom.

 

[ishdakuteb]

Thanks for all the advice.

How valuable is the IS on the Mark I? And is the F4 IS good for indoor portraits on a crop camera? Logic would suggest that it would basically be giving me a f5.6 depth of field wide open on the 70D. is that correct?

Thanks again.

if i remember correctly, 70-200mm f/2.8 IS version 1 has 3 stop of IS whereas 70-200mm f/4 IS has 4 stop. about the sharpness, to me 70-200mm f/4 IS is more better than 70-200mm f/2.8 IS version 1 even at f/4. i am not trying to say that version 1 is not good, i did own this version before upgrading to version II, and version I served me pretty well on my candid shots.

as many people suggestion on 85mm f/1.8 for in door portrait, i am on the same page with them. but i do not have 85mm f/1.8; i am using 50mm f/1.4 instead for everyday purposes (it is 80mm on crop.) ideal focal length of portrait photograhy is twice of your sensor size if i am right (i think i got this information from computer science 178 course offered by uc stanford). all i have to do is just zoom by feet. number of people say that this lens is tack sharp at 2.8, but i see it at f/3.2 even at low light with high iso upto 1000 on my 30d, 3200 on my 7d and slightly greater than 6400 on my 5d3. however, i am not hesitate to use wider f/stop or even widest if i have to... below are images that i have recently shot with this lens at f/2 with my 30d (note: the very first image were shot with PL linear filter to get rid some of reflection that i did not want with breaking rule of using PL filter.)

for some reasons, available light in-door portrait without IS on 70-200mm f/2.8 does not convince me much on golden rule of shutter speed (yes, i violate shutter speed sometimes, but not all the time ), especially you have not eaten breakfast, lunch or dinner before shooting ;D

note: there is a pro protographer who is currently using 70-200mm f/4 IS and he is happy with it. his name is Tony Corbel. i am not a pro. photographer, i am just a learner and hobbyist giving out my own thoughts...