What the better value?

[grey4]

I've finally saved up some money for a new lens and I wanted to take a little poll.

Would you rather purchase the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM ii, or purchase both the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro?

The way I see it, with modern ISO performance on FF cameras, f/2.8 isn't as critical as it use to be, but I wanted to read some discussion.

Thanks

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

You need to shoot sports or dance indoors? If your answer is yes, F2.8 is a great benefit to freeze the motion. Otherwise, 70-200 F4 will serve you very well.

 

[wsheldon]

You can't really go wrong either way. I personally went the 70-200 f4is + 100macro route, which are awesome for general and nature photography and easier to travel with, but if portraits or events are your thing you can't beat the versatility of the 2.8 zoom. Neither 70-200 can touch the macro near their minimum focus distance, particularly the f4 (MFD sharpness is it's only real shortcoming in my experience), so if you like any kind of close-ups or macro that would argue for the f4 + macro option. Real world IQ would be very close for all 3 lenses, and each is awesome within its range.

Good luck!

 

[Dylan777]

I've finally saved up some money for a new lens and I wanted to take a little poll.

Would you rather purchase the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM ii, or purchase both the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro?

The way I see it, with modern ISO performance on FF cameras, f/2.8 isn't as critical as it use to be, but I wanted to read some discussion.

Thanks

f2.8 still feel a bit slow sometime, even on 1dx.

 

[cycleraw]

That's a tough decision. I have both the 70-200 f2.8L IS II and 100 f2.8L macro and both are great lenses. If I didn't have the 100 f2.8L I'd miss it for those macro shots but I couldn't live without my 70-200 f2.8L IS II, it is so versatile. I use it for everything from shooting outdoor sports, indoor activities, portraits and even landscapes. So I'd get the more expensive and versatile 70-200 now and save a bit longer to get the 100 f2.8L macro.

 

[preppyak]

I've finally saved up some money for a new lens and I wanted to take a little poll.

Would you rather purchase the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM ii, or purchase both the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro?

The way I see it, with modern ISO performance on FF cameras, f/2.8 isn't as critical as it use to be, but I wanted to read some discussion.

Thanks

If you shoot a lot of action, then get the f/2.8 version. It makes a big difference for shutter speed reasons and for auto-focus reasons (most of the dual-cross points are f/2.8 reliant). If you arent shooting fast action, then I gotta say, the f/4L IS was my favorite lens I owned. Sharp, great AF, great build. If I didnt need the f/2.8, I'd have owned it a very long time.

An alternative to your problem may be the get the 70-200 f/2.8 and then look into getting a legacy, manual focus macro lens. Pretty easy to get ones that go down to 1:2 for fairly cheap, and even some 1:1 lenses can be had cheap too.

 

[privatebydesign]

I'd buy the 70-200 f2.8 IS MkII now and save some more and get the macro, or, actually, the other way around. Never get a lens you are not 100% about and think is a compromise, you already have 'negative' feelings about the 70-200 f4 because if it wasn't for budget you wouldn't get it.

I have had the 70-200 f2.8IS MkI since it came out, and when I use it I use it a lot, but since getting the 100L macro I use the zoom less and less, they are surprisingly complimentary lenses that have a certain on paper duality but in the flesh are quite different beasts. I wouldn't be without either but if I could only have one it would be the macro, and I can't believe I am saying that, but at this point for me, personally, that would be my choice.

 

[StudentOfLight]

I mainly shoot events and portraiture so for a similar amount of money I opted for the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC, 135mm f/2 L and the 100mm (non-L) macro. I normally carry two out of these three lens options when I'm on a job so I have a backup option in case of an accidental damage or equipment malfunction.

To me the wider apertures are helpful for maintaining fast shutter speeds without having to bump up ISO as much (e.g. sports), aiding in low-light focusing (e.g. sports/events), for harnessing flash power (e.g. portraiture/events) and as a compositional tool (blurring background elements). These are the reasons I opted for lenses which are f/2.8 and faster.

 

[timmy_650]

I would say the 70-200 2.8. I have the 70-200 f4 and 100L combo which is nice. I like now much lighter the F4 is and that is really nice for hiking but I it is also really nice to have the 2.8 bc then you can put a 2x on the lens get a usable 400mm lens. The 100L was really fun when i first got it but now i don't use it all that much.

 

[rpt]

You have to tell us what you shoot or else you will get us telling what we like...

 

[Random Orbits]

I've finally saved up some money for a new lens and I wanted to take a little poll.

Would you rather purchase the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM ii, or purchase both the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM and the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro?

The way I see it, with modern ISO performance on FF cameras, f/2.8 isn't as critical as it use to be, but I wanted to read some discussion.

Thanks

Your signature lists a 7D and an EF-S 10-22, so are you planning on staying with APS-C or moving to FF? If you plan on staying with the 7D, it is better to go with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II because crop bodies can use all the light they can get. Even with FF, I'd still recommend the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II over the other option for most users. And if you have kids or need to shoot events indoors, f/2.8 is the slowest you want to use when the light is low. Shooting at ISO 6400 and above indoors with f/2.8 already restricts DR and editing latitude significantly. Having to go to ISO 12800 with an f/4 lens is worse. So, I'd suggest trying the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II in the store and see if the weight and size suits you. If it does, I'd opt for that option over the 70-200 f/4 IS + 100L. You can always get the macro later. :

 

[nc0b]

I shoot indoor dance events, so it is the 70-200mm IS II and a 6D. If I am at the park, the f/4 works just fine on any body I have, even with a 1.4X TC III. I don't do much macro, so I have the tiny 50mm f2.5 when needed.