Old lenses - really so bad?

[daniela]

Today I got my "new" 70D back from the shop I bought it in Munich. They exchanged it, after an system breakdown (posted).
My question: The shop assistents told me to exchange 2 of my lenses. I own an 70-200mm 2.8L and an 28-70mm L 2.8. I bought them about 7-8 years ago and they work well.
Are they really so "sub" using them on the 70D?
They said, that the 70D requires an IS Lens, the 70-200 II or the 24-70 2.8 II (no IS). Is this true?

MTx
Dani

 

[m]

Required to do...what?

Do you like the pictures you take?
If not, what do you not like and would those lenses help you fix it?

 

[ahab1372]

The 70D does not "require" those lenses (or any other IS lenses), and neither does any other camera.
The newer lenses you mentioned do have better Image Quality, but that doesn't mean you cannot use the ones you have. If the better IQ is worth the higher price is completely up to you.
In my experience, what is most noticeable when upgrading equipment, is the fact that my creativity (or lack thereof) has not changed at all

Viele Grüße nach München

 

[dr croubie]

Damn, I'd better throw out about 50 of my >30 year-old lenses, they're obviously not as good as my latest lenses.
Yes, the 70-200 II and 24-70 II *are* better than the ones you have currently, in most respects. But why exchange them if they do what you need? You'll be about $1000-$2000 out-of-pocket per lens, is that worth it for snapshots?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Today I got my "new" 70D back from the shop I bought it in Munich. They exchanged it, after an system breakdown (posted).
My question: The shop assistents told me to exchange 2 of my lenses. I own an 70-200mm 2.8L and an 28-70mm L 2.8. I bought them about 7-8 years ago and they work well.
Are they really so "sub" using them on the 70D?
They said, that the 70D requires an IS Lens, the 70-200 II or the 24-70 2.8 II (no IS). Is this true?

MTx
Dani

Your old lenses are superb lenses, true, the newer ones are better, but You have very good ones. It sounds like either the person who told you that was incompetent, or was trying to sell you new lenses you don't need.
You do not need IS lenses, they do make it easier for inexperienced photographers, and experienced photographers like them on the longer focal lengths. Somehow, photographers got along for 100 years without IS lenses.

 

[jdramirez]

Today I got my "new" 70D back from the shop I bought it in Munich. They exchanged it, after an system breakdown (posted).
My question: The shop assistents told me to exchange 2 of my lenses. I own an 70-200mm 2.8L and an 28-70mm L 2.8. I bought them about 7-8 years ago and they work well.
Are they really so "sub" using them on the 70D?
They said, that the 70D requires an IS Lens, the 70-200 II or the 24-70 2.8 II (no IS). Is this true

no... they were trying to sell you something that is better, but not required. is is absolutely not a requirement... maybe if you have a shaking disease.

 

[mwh1964]

Odd advise coming from that store. Enjoy your new camera and older lenses.

 

[eosuser1234]

Often this sales tactic is used in stores carrying used equipment. They usually offer a trade in credit off for your old lenses, but it will be really low usually, only a hundred of dollars if that. They get more used inventory at dirt cheap prices to sell, and move new product at the same time.

Any EF lense will work on any EOS camera.

 

[alexanderferdinand]

In a shop they always try to sell you something.
Your lenses are "usable". P

 

[M.ST]

You don´t need IS lenses for any camera, but for beginners (and pros in some situations) a IS lenses can save your day and image.

 

[greger]

Maybe you need a new shop to buy equipment from. The only reason to upgrade lenses is they don't work anymore. I
read that my 7D needs good glass. My 17-85 works fine on the 7D and I don't consider it good glass compared to other
lenses Canon makes. I won't be replacing it as it seems to have improved on the 7D compared to the 40D it came with ;D

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Find a new camera shop - with advise like that they are not trustworthy and are just trying to get your money!
You have 2 excellent lenses that many photographers can only dream of owning.

 

[tron]

Sorry for the late reply, I just saw this thread. I would get rid of 28-70 2.8 as soon as possible

See: http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/31249/why-is-there-glow-around-lights-in-every-photo-shot-with-my-canon-ef-28-70mm-f-2

or search google for Canon 28-70 2.8 fog issues

 

[eninja]

Well, I think I read it somewhere in the 70D AF bug thread, that newer lens got rotation counter making them more accurate to AF. Maybe this is what the guy is trying to imply. Knowing this makes me want to move to newer lens.. but what the heck, im still ok with my old lens.

 

[tron]

I was not satisfied with my 28-70 2.8 so I sold it back in 2009 when I moved into FF. However my 70-200 2.8L was very good!
(Unfortunately it was stolen )

 

[NancyP]

If you want to do video, you might want a newer lens for video (keep the others), but IS STM type (cheap). Maybe. Just use your current lenses. Trade up only if you see specific characteristics that could be improved on in a new model. Pay more attention to your eyes than to the salesman.

FWIW, I am still using, via adapters, several old all manual lenses from the 1960s and 1970s on the 6D. Yes, the new Sigma 50 1.4 Art will beat the pants off the AIS Nikkor 50 f/1.2 wide open - but if what I want is landscape at f/5.6, the Nikkor is just fine and is over a pound lighter. Also, that (Nikkor, and every other f/1.2 or f/1.4 1970s 50-60mm lens) classic double Gauss design spherical aberration wide open can be fun to use for effect sometimes - the hazy romantic look.

 

[AE1Pguy]

No, those older lenses are absolutely worthless. If you send them to me, I will dispose of them properly.

 

[Aichbus]

So true! My 2.8/300L, 4/500L and 2/135L are the worst lenses in my gear!

 

[sanj]

If you are the type of guy who always shoots in good light, or always uses a tripod, you do not need to upgrade.

 

[dak723]

They said, that the 70D requires an IS Lens, the 70-200 II or the 24-70 2.8 II (no IS). Is this true?

Where I come from, this is called a lie. No camera requires an IS lens.

I am surprised that someone working in a photo shop would say something that is so dishonest - even if they hoped to sell you a newer lens.