Speaking of Lens Lust...

[Sime]

Yes Please....



I'll have one of those...

[Tift-45]

I want it too!

[RolandAA]

Looks like a nice upgrade to my F/4. But since they'll probably be in short supply for a while and I'm such a nice guy I'll let you have my place in line this time.

[GadgetRick]

Me likey. I guess he's not really a Canon guy. Made mention of that and he uses a Nikon neck strap...

[donniecs]

I was about to pull the trigger on the original 70-200 (as my longest lens is the 24-105 f/4L) but I've been debating wether or not to pull the trigger on the mkII version. I think I'm going to take the plunge and spend the extra cash on the mkII version as a lens investment last so much longer than a body.

[GadgetRick]

Originally Posted by donniecs

I was about to pull the trigger on the original 70-200 (as my longest lens is the 24-105 f/4L) but I've been debating wether or not to pull the trigger on the mkII version. I think I'm going to take the plunge and spend the extra cash on the mkII version as a lens investment last so much longer than a body.

I'd say, if you can afford it, go for it. But I'd wait a little bit for the prices to stabilize. When these things first come out they don't discount them. After a while, they settle the prices in a bit.

I'll probably pick up the previous version later this year unless good things happen and I can afford a new one....

[irispatch]

Are you sure you really need f2.8? A lot of people get the 2.8 version and quickly realize that the price, length and weight just are not to their liking they switch back to the f4 IS version. IQ is as good or better in a smaller, lighter package and you have a heavier wallet.

[Saralonde]

I'd love one, too. If only it was a little lighter in weight (and lighter on the wallet ).

[GadgetRick]

Originally Posted by irispatch

Are you sure you really need f2.8? A lot of people get the 2.8 version and quickly realize that the price, length and weight just are not to their liking they switch back to the f4 IS version. IQ is as good or better in a smaller, lighter package and you have a heavier wallet.

For me, yes, I need it. I shoot a lot of sports (indoors) and need the wide aperture.

Also, the F2.8 glass should be better than f4.0 either way. So you should still be able to get better image quality (all things being equal).

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by GadgetRick

For me, yes, I need it. I shoot a lot of sports (indoors) and need the wide aperture.

Also, the F2.8 glass should be better than f4.0 either way. So you should still be able to get better image quality (all things being equal).

Then why do many people say the 70-200 f/4 is better than the f/2.8 version?

And much the same on the Nikon side: the 85mm f/1.8 / f.1.4 debate: in certain situations the "lesser" of the two is better.