| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Is it time to get a new lens
Brent Asay, Photographer
 |
SLC | Ut | USA | Posted: 11:28 AM on 04.24.09 |
| ->> I have to send my Canon 70-200 f2.8 in for repairs, and I'm wonding if I should just upgrade to a 70-200mm f2.8L EF IS USM. Any opions? |
|
Khai Le, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Riverside | CA | USA | Posted: 11:50 AM on 04.24.09 |
->> Depends on your shooting style, what you shoot, etc. My non-IS model gets me through 95% of what I do, but there have been times where I wish I had IS.
I might upgrade to IS one day, but it's not that high up on my list right now. |
|
Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 11:50 AM on 04.24.09 |
| ->> Unless you need the IS, I prefer the version without. It's sharper. |
|
Phil Hawkins, Photographer
|
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 11:50 AM on 04.24.09 |
| ->> I don't think Canon makes a non-L 2.8. Are you referring to an IS vs non-IS? How do you use the lens? |
|
Trevor Brown, Photographer, Assistant
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 1:01 PM on 04.24.09 |
->> Brent, I've heard that they may be updating the 70-200 2.8 IS sometime this year.
I was thinking about doing the same thing, but just got my regular 70-200 back from CPS and it's like new again! So, I'd wait it out a little while longer and see if something comes out this year. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 3:17 PM on 04.24.09 |
->> Depends on what you shoot, I've had both and they are both very good lenses. If you really "pixel peep" at 200% the non IS is slightly, and I mean slightly sharper wide open, and its also slightly lighter.
If you don't have a specfic need for IS then I wouldnt upgrade as the price difference is (or was, assuming they still sell the non IS version) about $500 or so. Thats a lot of money for a feature you might not need and for a lens thats technically not quite as sharp.
I went back and forth having them both at the same time and thinking I'd sell the IS version as I wasn't using it for sports, but then did a candle lit wedding ceremony where being able to shoot handheld at 1/60th and get sharp shots was very useful so I was glad to have the IS version.
Some would argue a faster prime could of worked as well and with the savings over the IS version you could certainly put that money towards a 85 1.8 or 135 f2 or similar, but sometimes a fast apeture isn't a solution when you need the DOF. For example I wanted to get 2 people in focus so shooting my 85 1.2 wide open wouldnt of worked. I need a smaller apeture and IS to get the shot.
Really depends what you shoot though and with current cameras having even better high ISO performance you might be able to even shoot non IS handheld and get sharp results.
To summarize, I wouldn't upgrade unless you have found yourself in situations where IS would come in handy. Its nice to have "Just in case" but not at the price premium |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|