Opinion on 70-200 Options
- Thread starter Luds34
- Start date
NancyP said:
Yep, I agree completely. My interest is more action, portrait work so the faster aperture helps with low light sports/action and of course better bokeh, narrower DOF. I gravitate towards the wider end for my landscape shots, and have accepted the compromise of the weight of this lens for if I do need to use it for landscape. The f/4 IS is the perfect backpacking lens of the group for sure. As an ex owner of the similarly sized and weighted f/4 non IS I can appreciate how easy it is to carry for what one gets.
Here is a quick test shot I took with the new lens last night. I think this will work out, although I need to be careful on focus/recompose with the narrower DOF and switch to outer focus points. No drastic post processing applied, just white balance, exposure, lens profile correction.
20150629-IMG_2284-6D by Ryan Ludwig, on Flickr
Upvote
0
Haydn1971 said:
I hear you. If I was a pro shooting for hours on end I'm sure the weight would get to me. But as it stands now, for my uses I find the the lens very comfortable to hand hold and steady. While it does start to dwarf the 6D a little bit, it still balances very well and feels good in the hands.
Upvote
0
Berowne said:
Hi Andy,
I'm starting to feel pretty good about my kit. However, the one lens I want to add is a very fast 35mm prime (like the Sigma Art). And if there is a 2nd lens, it would be the 135mm f/2L. It is not a high priority (especially after adding the 70-200 f/2.8) but I see it in my future at some point.
Thanks again all for the feedback. The conversation and purchase has been enjoyable. Now to get out and shoot.
Upvote
0
P
Pookie
Guest
Luds34 said:Berowne said:
Hi Andy,
I'm starting to feel pretty good about my kit. However, the one lens I want to add is a very fast 35mm prime (like the Sigma Art). And if there is a 2nd lens, it would be the 135mm f/2L. It is not a high priority (especially after adding the 70-200 f/2.8) but I see it in my future at some point.
Thanks again all for the feedback. The conversation and purchase has been enjoyable. Now to get out and shoot.
I've had 3 70-200 II over the years. Two have been sold... Every time, I use them for a while and then they get less and less use. I think they are the darlings of the Canon world and therefore receive much (well deserved) praise but they are not the end all be all for portraiture. They are also very much the first foray into bigger whites so they are near and dear to many. Again though, heavy and other lenses do just as well.
And don't ever underestimate the 135... it holds it's own in my bag. The king 200 f/2 is everything it is cracked up to be but also big and puts your subject way out at yelling distance. The 70-200 is a hard choice if I have my 85 II or 135 because they are so much easier to handle while working with clients... also you're at a good conversation distance. The 35mm rarely comes out to play these days for portraiture or just about anything else, especially after the arrival of the 24-70 II.
I own a lots of L and over the last few years in my portraiture business there are a few key players I couldn't go without... 24-70L , 85L, and the 135L. Sadly I could do easily do without the 70-200 and the 200 f/2.
Cheap, easy and superb... don't forget the 135L.
Upvote
0
Pookie said:Luds34 said:Berowne said:
Hi Andy,
I'm starting to feel pretty good about my kit. However, the one lens I want to add is a very fast 35mm prime (like the Sigma Art). And if there is a 2nd lens, it would be the 135mm f/2L. It is not a high priority (especially after adding the 70-200 f/2.8) but I see it in my future at some point.
Thanks again all for the feedback. The conversation and purchase has been enjoyable. Now to get out and shoot.
I've had 3 70-200 II over the years. Two have been sold... Every time, I use them for a while and then they get less and less use. I think they are the darlings of the Canon world and therefore receive much (well deserved) praise but they are not the end all be all for portraiture. They are also very much the first foray into bigger whites so they are near and dear to many. Again though, heavy and other lenses do just as well.
And don't ever underestimate the 135... it holds it's own in my bag. The king 200 f/2 is everything it is cracked up to be but also big and puts your subject way out at yelling distance. The 70-200 is a hard choice if I have my 85 II or 135 because they are so much easier to handle while working with clients... also you're at a good conversation distance. The 35mm rarely comes out to play these days for portraiture or just about anything else, especially after the arrival of the 24-70 II.
I own a lots of L and over the last few years in my portraiture business there are a few key players I couldn't go without... 24-70L , 85L, and the 135L. Sadly I could do easily do without the 70-200 and the 200 f/2.
Cheap, easy and superb... don't forget the 135L.
You know, I've almost got the 135L a few times. I really like your portrait work. I mean, a whole lot. The 200 f/2L is on my short list too, but I would like to know why you prefer the 135L to it. Easier focus? This particular photo is just fantastic!
Nevermind, I see it... size and distance from the subject.
Upvote
0
Pookie said:
Will do... it's on my wish list! Great shot by the way. I love it, perfect lighting. I especially love the dark, rich greens in the background which really helps your subject pop with perfect contrast between the two.
I have to ask, what do you use for outdoor strobes? And how do you remote fire them? I have a handful of cheap yongnuo speedlites and some light stands/umbrellas and they work excellent for indoors. The latest ones have the built in RF so it's a single 603c in the hot shoe and I'm up and running quickly. But I've been wanting to "control the light" outdoors and have not been sure what the best route to go, especially on sunny days. ND filters, or high speed sync? Will my speedlites have enough power? I'm just not sure where to go.
Upvote
0
