What’s Your Preference?

MrJones · #1 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 05:57 AM

I'm thinking of buying it along with the 24-70mm f/2.8 USM.
the only thing is I can't afford the 70-200mm USM IS, just the USM.
will it be sharp for outdoor photography? indoor?
how "slow" can I use it indoors?
thanks!

RichardTaylor · #2 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 08:38 AM

It is an excellent lens. Beautiful IQ - even wide open and super sharp, very fast focussing, mechanically great and not heavy.
In good light it is an excellent lens.
I own one and it is mostly used for shooting outdoor events..

How slow can you use it indoors?
(1) On a tripod with a static subject, as slow as you like.
(2) For non tripod use or for with moving subjects.

What ISO are you prepared to use?

Will you be using a flash gun?

How slow can you hand hold when using it at 200mm?
For me it is no less than 1/200 (on a full frame camera or around 1/300 on a crop camera) to obtain consistent results.

Being F4 it is not a good low available light lens.

gturner · #3 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 08:46 AM

I have both the 2.8 and F4

The F4 non IS is sharper and faster for outside work. It is the best value for money lens going, even at $600, it is not good indoors. You will not regret it and you will always be able to sell it.

The 2.8 in low light or with a converter, is awesome.

MrJones · #4 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 08:57 AM

Richard,
I'm willing to go up to 400 or even 800 ISO for some cases, not planning on using a tripod as it's suppose to be the second lens for photographing weddings and such.
will it be good for outdoors and a few indoors shots? I have a flash, not sure about using it with such a lens as I'm planning on using it for long shots.
when saying that you won't go above 1/300 - which ISO are you using?
from your answer I basically get that I'll be using the 70-200 for the bride and groom photos before the wedding and the 24-70 for the actual party. am I correct?

Gturner,
the big question here is whether to buy the non IS version now or wait to next year or so and get the IS.
the purpose will be mainly for outside but also to photograph a wedding for example from a distance.
in a wedding I guess the 24-70 will be most used but I would still like a lens for distance shooting.

gturner · #5 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 09:51 AM

As a medium tele-action lens, it cannot be beaten. It is not a wedding lens (if weddings are a business for you)

I would certainly look at picking up a Mk1 version of the 2.8 IS if the Mark II is too expensive. Same goes again if you want to get the Non-IS 2.8. The extra stop is more important and useful than the F4 with IS for the same price for YOUR needs
This is possibly why you went 24-70 over 24-105 IS

RichardTaylor · #6 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 10:01 AM

Outdoors it is great.
Just the lens for head shots etc.
All have been PP'd from the original RAW files.

(1) @ F4 & 200mm

(2) @ F5.6 & 200mm

(3) Again @ F4 & 188mm

I have only used it once indoors - with a flash, Before I had ~ F2 primes.

A long way away from the subject.
F4 @ 1/200 & ISO 800 on a 350D + 580EX flash (on camera.

Normally I try to keep my ISO as low as possible but do not have any problems shooting at 800 (350D or 40D) or 1600 for the 5D depending on the subject

MrJones · #7 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 11:05 AM

well, it produces great results, that's for sure.
the thing is again, I can only afford the non IS f/4 at the moment and hate to postpone it for another year.
the big question here is wether it can be enough together with the 24-70 which is f/2.8 or should I just wait another year and purchase the IS version of the f/4.
the 24-70 for indoors and low light. the 70-200 for outdoors, portrait shoots and a bit of closeups indoors.

gturner · #8 (**permalink**) 07-23-2010, 11:17 AM

I would buy it because the resale value is excellent, you will nearly be able to match the purchase price.
I can assure you the results are more than worth it.

It is not worth buying the IS version of the F4 over it at a later stage. Use the non-IS until you can buy the 2.8 IS

MrJones · #9 (**permalink**) 07-24-2010, 11:43 AM

ok, so I came across some money which can finance half the lens.
now the big question is between the 70-200 f/4 IS USM or the 70-200 f/2.8 USM.
I'll be moving a lot with the lens and I tend to go after the f/4 because of the weight (760gr vs. 1300gr)
what do you think? did anyone here experienced the f/2.8? is it that heavy to walk around with?