View Full Version : Which telephoto?
I've decided my 75-300 f4-5.6 IS just isn't cutting it anymore and i want to upgrade to L glass...
At present i'm earning from my club work and just starting to earn from my modely work. The telephoto would be predominately for wildlife, airshows and fingers crossed a few of the festivals coming up (unlikely to be earning from these)
I will of course be buying from Kerso!
I'm looking at the;
100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS (About £850)
300mm f4 L IS (Just under £700)
The other alternative i guess is the 70-200 f2.8 L IS (about £1000 i guess?)
Any recommendations/comments/first hand experience? :)
Highlander
09-05-2007, 08:31
I have the 100-400mm which is probably my most used lens. I think it's a great lens, but other people seem to have had issues with it. Some banter about it in this thread (http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=471562). Not got any experience of the other 2, but believe they are also great lenses. Depends what you want it for?
I don't think a prime will suit my needs so i think that rules out the 300mm f4 L IS....
The question is do i want speed/low light ability (i.e. the 70-200 f2.8) or the length?
I've heard rumors that the 70-200 isn't great wide open anyway? the dof would have to be pretty shallow so it might not be worth it...
If you can stretch to it, I hear the 2.8 IS is a good low light telephoto, and would be my choice for wildlife/festival/airshow as you have the option of using it with a TC if you need it longer.
How did you get on with your 24-70L?
I can't speak for the Canon specifics, but my first telephoto was the Nikon 300mm f/4. While's it's a fantastic lens, I have found it very restrictive for anything where the range between you & subject is constantly changing. I found there to be alot of occasions where the 300mm is just too long. It's going to be excellent for the airshows though.
To compliment it, I'm about to pick up the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 today which seems to get excellent reviews all round.. I'm certainly looking forward to getting some control back regarding shot framing etc..
Ive had a fun day at oulton park with a Sigma 100-300F4. HSM for fast focusing. Close focus was pretty impressive and the quality of images has impressed me big time.
Since i've gone L i don't think i can go back!
The talk seems to suggest 70-200 f2.8 w/ 1.4x TC isn't great... but that's where you guys can hopefully help me out! Are there many situations where i'd actually be able to shoot at 2.8?
And nana i'm loving the 24-70 L; had a wikid shoot on friday;
Gallery (http://www.dontstayin.com/uk/southend-on-sea/a-secret-location/2007/may/04/gallery-204480/home/photok-6024668)
http://sb.dontstayin.com/b5/7b/b57b43da-5b56-440e-9d3b-dae20319a128.jpg
http://s3.dontstayin.com/33/be/33be46d4-a71f-405c-ba6d-393e36713508.jpg
http://s9.dontstayin.com/98/9b/989b3c83-ca2e-4079-abc8-dc304f985cf3.jpg
Is it a 5D you have? If so I don't think the 70-200 would be long enough for wildlife etc. It would be a fantastic portrait lens though, and is great wide open.
I took my entry in this thread http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=472383 with mine. Number 9 "Chafing"
Na- i'm still on a crappy 400D at the mo :) And expect my next upgrade would be a 40D... still 1.6x crop... although potentialy a 1D / 3D...
I just can't see the 200 being enough after having a 300 previously...
Radiohead
09-05-2007, 11:44
The talk seems to suggest 70-200 f2.8 w/ 1.4x TC isn't great... but that's where you guys can hopefully help me out! Are there many situations where i'd actually be able to shoot at 2.8?
Eh?
Matholwch
09-05-2007, 11:46
For the subject matter you mentioned in your first post, I'd say the 100-400 L. The 70-200 will not be long enough for your needs, whereas the 1.4x deteriates the quality to a below 100-400 standard (according to others).
Here's a shot I took with my 100-400 at 400mm, family photo kinda thing so not that interesting.
http://www.rhif12.co.uk/teulu/slides/IMG_6990-2.jpg
Guy had a Canon 135mm that looked absolutely gorgeous for a portraiture lens.
I don't do that much of it, but I've always found 105-135mm to be where you want to be for portraits, even on DX.
I know it's not a critique thread, but the foreshortening on that last shot is a bit odd Lee - it looks like someone's photoshopped her head in :confused:
If you're going to need 200mm+ a lot of the time then the 100-400 is your best bet as the 70-200 2.8 IS is going to be slightly soft even with a 1.4. It is the better lens though imo, sorry I can't be more helpful.
Thanks for the link, I especially liked number 11 and 15 from your favourites, good shots and some nice poses.
Although I thought the two B&W conversions made the girl look a little dark under the eyes. Nothing that can't be fixed though, very nice skin tones otherwise.
EDIT: Have you thought of looking at www.pixel-peeper.com website? You can usually get a good idea of what a lens is capable of by looking there, if you don't mind trawling through photos for half an hour.
I'm definitely leaning toward the 100-400...
Then i'll find i need to use higher ISO to get the shutter speeds i need in low light and have to purchase a better camera lol
I definitely will be needing a new bag... oh and update the insurance!
Thanks Nana; I was really pleased with the shots we got especially as we had limited time, weather etc. Had a look at pixel-peeper and everything looks great- so it's all about length!
John; that last shot is very "candid"- she's a bit of a mad one and pulls the funnies faces/poses etc- i just really liked that one for some reason (can definitely see what you're sayin though haha- most ppl think i photoshopped the eyes but i didn't touch them in any of the pics!
I've decided my 75-300 f4-5.6 IS just isn't cutting it anymore and i want to upgrade to L glass...
Don't forget the 70-200 f4 IS, which, having used it for a couple of weeks, I believe to be superior to the 70-200 f2.8 IS in every way.
My thoughts on the 100-400 have been done here before (i.e. avoid).
The 400 5.6 L is superb but of course the fixed focal length may limit you. I know of many people who have the 300 f4 IS and are delighted with it.
Hmmm, i've been advised very high chance i've got v, cream, global, o2 wireless, reading and sw4 tickets... so starting to think the 70-200 might be a wiser choice hmmmmmmmmmm!
t00thless
10-05-2007, 14:36
lee, if you are ever near london way, i have a 70-200 + 1.4x TC that you are more than willing to have a play around with.
I use mine for motorsports on a 1DMk2N, and i do find that 200 can be a bit short sometimes even when sitting trackside, the 1.4x does make it a tad bit softer, but not that much. I would like something with a bit more reach on it, but i dont like the idea of the 100-400, the push pull just doesnt do it for me, and i like to have the abality to zoom, so primes are out the window, so will have to stick with what i go for now till something else comes along.
But yeah my work schedule is a bit all over the place, but if you want to have a test give me a shout :)
Highlander
10-05-2007, 14:45
Just get both :nuts:
As said above, I already have the 100-400mm, but would also like to get the 70-200 f2.8 some time (in the distant future!!).
Just get both :nuts:
Ha! I wish! I'm going to have hard time justifying one- no way i can justify both (very unlikely they will earn me any money)
I work in London Monday - Thursday so i might take you up on that! I'm guessing that the 70-200 + tc will take me up to something like £1250ish tho? :cry:
t00thless
10-05-2007, 17:12
yeah mate thats about what i paid for my setup. let me know when you are about :)
I think i'll be getting a 70-200mm f/4L soon.
Sod it- i'm going to go for the 70-200... i can see this being a lot better at festivals, then will have to use a tc at airshows!
Canon offering £130 cashback on it at the moment too, so all good :)
So that just leaves one question... 1.4x or 2x tc?
downhillbiker
12-05-2007, 13:24
For big stages at gigs, a 70-200 F/2.8 is the dog's...
busterboy
12-05-2007, 16:04
Sod it- i'm going to go for the 70-200...
Which one?????
f.4
f.4 IS
f/2.8
f/2.8 IS
Any one of these lenses will give you brilliant results in quality, Don't expect the f.4 to compete with the 2.8 in low light..;)
Good choice, I love my F4, quality through and through. It's made me want more L lenses though which is not entirely a good thing for a photographer on a budget.
I'd guess you're going for the F2.8 IS? It's a great lens, I'm sure you won't regret splashing out and buying it.
70-200 f/2.8 IS of course :)
It should pair up with my 24-70 f2.8 L nicely :)
So what you reckon... 1.4x TC or 2x TC?
busterboy
12-05-2007, 16:34
So what you reckon... 1.4x TC or 2x TC?
1.4x will suit your needs plenty..:)
just ordered the 70-200 f2.8 L IS + 1.4x tc yeyyyyyyyyyyyyy :)
t00thless
14-05-2007, 02:16
good on you mate, sure you will enjoy the purchase :D
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.