I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

[IIIHobbs]

I'm seriously considering selling both 70-200's and then get the 135. Does anyone mind not having is on the 135?

The extra stop of light should come in handy when i shoot my daughter playing basketball.

Hey JD, me again.

Love the 135 f2L for Basketball; it is far superior to the 70-200 IMO. But beware, it has a very shallow DOF also.

It could potentially be a little short for outdoor sport; I prefer 300mm there.

 

[jdramirez]

I'm seriously considering selling both 70-200's and then get the 135. Does anyone mind not having is on the 135?

The extra stop of light should come in handy when i shoot my daughter playing basketball.

Hey JD, me again.

Love the 135 f2L for Basketball; it is far superior to the 70-200 IMO. But beware, it has a very shallow DOF also.

It could potentially be a little short for outdoor sport; I prefer 300mm there.

I thought I might be able to bring my flash (430exII) to the game, but I'm 99% confident my daughter would yell at me saying it was distracting. So... I'll need a body with solid iso performance and a big aperture. And as I've said before, I'm willing to sacrifice 60% of my shots if the 40% are SPECTACULAR.

As for outdoors, I think you are right, but it is only 67.5% less than the 70-200. So I should be able to crop in enough to make up for the difference. And I like to cherry pick shots, so I hang out around the goal line, so I'm only 10 yards away from the action (depending upon which direction the play goes.