looking for feedback on choosing a 70-200 for weddings.

Sort by date Sort by votes
#22
notoriouslightning said:
Just pulled the trigger on the 70-200 2.8 is II. Was wanting to use my rebate from the 24-70 but it looks like that will take some time. Just signed another wedding for January so I am super excited to have this guy for the ceremony. Thats for the input everyone.
Click to expand...

Congratulations.
Wish you good shooting now !
 
Upvote 0
#25
notoriouslightning said:
Im really excited about having the 24-70 and 70-200 combo for weddings. Im afraid my primes are going to get neglected. ;D
Click to expand...

They will, of course.
ISO 3200 and 6400 on the 5D3 allow you to shoot 2.8 most of the time. You'll almost never have to change your lens because it's too dark and you just need the extra light from a prime. You'll never miss that shot anymore cause you were switching lens when it happened.
You'll only get your primes when you want that look you can only get from an f/1.4 f/1.8 lens. That's the real improvement.

When i was shooting my 5D2, i had the Sigma 70-200 2.8 IS and the 85 1.8. I've spent a lot of time switching between these two lenses and i've probably miss plenty of shots because of that loss of time.
Now, with my 5D3 and Canon 70-200 II, i barely use the 85... I only get it when i know i want a shallower DOF or when i can't get the "big" white out of my bag. But never ever because of IQ issues.
 
Upvote 0
#26
Whichever way you go, you want an IS lens. The sharpness of the lens is wasted if it is moving.

There are two very good reasons to get the F4IS over the F2.8IS. The first is that you can not afford the F2.8 version. The second is if you are weight restricted and need the lighter lens (hikers, etc). For everything else, go for the F2.8.

Note that both lenses play very well with teleconverters......
 
Upvote 0
#27
I too have steady hands, which is wonderful. I own the IS version and can tell you from experience that I have kicked myself on more than one occasion for working a shoot and realizing that my image stabilizer was turned off. Tonight, I had a product shoot with a tripod and turned the IS off, next Saturday is a family shoot. By golly I just went to my lens to turn the IS back on. It is a wonderful asset to have and one that I would miss dearly, especially during weddings. I would save up a bit more and purchase the mark ii, or do what I had to do and rent it for all of my weddings until I saved up enough to buy the thing. Either way, I would not send you elsewhere.

Congrats on the growing business BTW, that's always exciting!

I hope this helps,
-Tabor
 
Upvote 0
#28
Here's another vote for the 70-200 f2.8 Mark II. I don't shoot weddings, but I do shoot events in similar conditions. My 70-200 is my most used lens and the IS is a big reason for it. I have no problem shooting down to 1/40 with it and get interesting shots with my subject still, but surrounding people in a slight blur. This isn't always my objective, I usually prefer 1/100 or faster, but there are times when you find a subject in poorer light and changing shutter speeds to get the shot is quicker than bumping up the ISO. You have to work quick at events and a monopod would be too slow and limiting. The IS does a great job of extending your freedom to get the shot in sometimes less than ideal positions.

More importantly, the IQ is fantastic and it does a great job of isolating your subjects. Of course, this all depends upon your style of covering these events. I prefer to stay in the background and love the perspective that I get with the longer focal lengths. This could well become your primary wedding lens. If so, the 2.8 IS version would be worth the investment.
 
Upvote 0
#29
As a generalization, it could be said that a wedding photographer without a 70-200 f/2.8isII is not adequately equipped. The exceptions will be photographers who have an evolved, distinctly individual style that may not include the 70-200 focal range eg a purist who shoots everything with a 35mm or 50mm prime, but for the vast majority of shooters, the flexibility coupled with awesome IQ makes the 70-200 f/2.8isII required kit. If you're serious about building your wedding business, don't save up for this lens...borrow the money and get it straight away. If you're good, you'll earn the money back soon enough.

-pw
 
Upvote 0
#30
First of all, either way I would go with IS because 4 stops of stabilization is a huge advantage for hand-held shooting. As for the 2.8L IS vs. 4L IS , the main advantages of the 4L are that it weighs half as much and costs 1k less. Sure, the 2.8 is one stop faster, but with a mk3, as u know an iso of 8000 still gives u great quality, so why spend the extra grand and lug that 2.8 beast around all day for one f-stop? Sharpness is razor-like with either. When 1600 iso was the limit, 2.8 made sense. Now not so much.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Cover Cap for removed tripod collar mount on 24-105 Z / 70-200 Z ?
Replies
2
Views
262
danfaz
danfaz
Canon Rumors
Is a non-L RF 70-200 f/2.8 or similar lens on the horizon?
Replies
32
Views
8K
ccming
ccming
Fbimages
Svalbard and Arctic pack ice, summer 2025
Replies
16
Views
2K
ArdoSmith
A
K
Weird little quirk I noticed about the zoom lock switch on the RF 24-70 2.8
Replies
6
Views
4K
scyrene
S
R
EF 70-200 loses Focus on my EOS R6 Mark II
Replies
2
Views
3K
ronbyram
R
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu