felix_ing Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Hi there, Please give me some opinions as to my lens purchase dilemma. EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM = $2300 CND EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM = $1500 CND EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM = $1050 CND Now I'm a freelancer, might potentially do some runway shoots but I intend to do mostly fashion portraits (I have just rented the IS version and will be testing it out tmr during a fashion show, if I fall in love with it, then that's a different story, but I don't even have the non-IS version to compare...) Would you rather not buy the IS version 70-200 and add $250 for 2 L lenses? And yes I still shoot film so if I have to get dSLR I'd have no choice but to go 30d or even xt! (since my budget priority is given to L lenses) I've talked to 2 photographers and they say IS is a MUST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disneyry Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Unless what you will be shooting makes IS manditory, I would suggest that you get the non-IS and the 24-70mm. Later on, if you decide that you really need IS, you can sell the 70-200mm non-IS for nearly what you paid for it and then upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike butler Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Hi Felix, Get a 200mm 1.8L and your 2 photographer friends will be jealous of you, especially when you show them your runway shots and fashion portraits. But, hey, the 70-200 IS is probably more practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickvandenberg Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 A little off topic, but before you spend $2300 CDN on the IS lens, check B&H's prices. On the other hand, the 24-70 price you list is less than B&H's. Is it used? The non-IS 70-200mm is supposed to be a little bit sharper than the IS version. Aside from that, just try turning the IS off on the one you're renting, and see how it goes. I would think that for your application, the IS would be very helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iori Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I have 3 IS lenses, the 24-105, the 70-200 and the 75-300. The IS may not be essential on the 25-105, but at or beyond 200mm, I find it difficult to handhold steadily enough except in bright, outdoor conditions. At those distances, camera shake is magnified too much. Of course, the problem is further magnified 1.6-fold on a non-FF digital camera. I use my 70-200 for my children's indoor concert photos, and I find the IS essential, even with the ISO turned way up on my Rebel XT. I'd say get the IS. You won't have any regrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_m2 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 For telephoto, it's tripod or IS--it's your choice. Furthermore, f2 is no replacement for IS on a telephoto--the DOF on f2 is too shallow on many shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pturton Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Two bodies are a must; one for the 24-70L and one for the 70-200L IS. When things are happening fast, it is not the time to be changing lenses. It only takes one picture saved by IS or by switching body/lens combo to realize the benifits of such a kit. When working for pay, back-up is essential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disneyry Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Iori, I agree with what you are saying about IS being useful in the longer focal lengths, but to say "the problem is further magnified 1.6-fold on a non-FF digital camera" is totally misleading. The crop factor has nothing to do with the magnification of the image, you just see less of the image circle that is made by the lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iori Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Ryan, I think you know what I meant. One uses a telephoto zoom for the flexibility it offers. On a non-FF camera with the 1.6x crop factor, the 70-200 zoom effectively becomes a 112-320 lens; a range that makes the IS a must for most conditions required by the original poster. In the course of shooting in a fashion show or concert setting, it is not necessarily desirable or even possible to limit the zoom range to a handholdable range. Such use would in any event defeat the flexibility afforded by a zoom lens. Your argument is premised on shooting conditions where the object is static at a fixed distance so that the image size remains the same, in which case a more appropriate tool may be a fixed tele with an aperture larger than the 2.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 >>I intend to do mostly fashion portraits<< If the subject is moving IS won't do much to stop motion blur. I would get two lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix_ing Posted April 1, 2006 Author Share Posted April 1, 2006 Verdict: Thank Canon for IS, AMEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now