L-Fever: What next?

[Swiss]

Hi Community,

I have it: the L-Fever.

My equipment includes quite a few primes (24, 35, 50, 85, 100, 135) and just some zooms (16-35, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300).

Now I got a wildcard as next lense approved by my wife :-) but I am really struggeling to cometo an decision. The following ideas are in my mind and I would like to hear your thoughts on those (disregard the price tag as I got a 'wildcard' ;-) )
1. 14 mm. That would mean I would sell the 16-35. But at the end I am quite happy with the zoom as it is fast and the iq is also great
2. 200 2.0 L. No doubt an improvement to my 70-200 2.8 II but than again I think a 300er or 400er would improve my equipment even more
3. 300 2.8 II, Would be much faster than my 70-300 and the IQ is better. What I like about it: It is handholdable. But for what would I use this prime? Sports no doubt and Wildlife. For both you can't have enough focal length in my opinion. So wouldn't be the 400er the better choice?
4. 400 2.8 II, great lense, Perfect for sports and wildlife. You could use it with a 1.4 or without. But the weight? Is this lense going to be so inconvinient that I would avoid using it? You have to take into account that I am not a pro and I love traveling without a tripod.

I look forward to your thoughts!

Cheers,
Chris

[Dave Throgmartin]

Hi Chris,

What are you finding that your current lenses don't do as well as you'd like?

Dave

[HDNitehawk]

Hi Chris and welcome;

Just my thoughts;
1. 14mm, I have the 24mm, 35mm and the 16-35. I never use the 16-35 anymore and have often thought of getting the 14mm. The 14mm is super wide and would be fun, but it really is a specialty lens.
2. 200mm 2.0L, if you shoot indoor sports it would be a good addition. But you have a 70-200mm II f/2.8 so I think you could benefit more by a different focal length.
3. Lots of uses for the 300 F2.8II. Even with the old version of this lens you could put a 1.4x on it and almost see very little loss in IQ. I own the old version, for the daughters softball games it is almost to long and I end up using my 70-200mm II sometimes. For the grandsons baseball games it is perfect. For the sons graduation in an indoor arena it is perfect. For Zoo trips it is perfect. For wildlife it is on the short side but with the tele convertors it can be adequate. The supertele's are big lenses, this one you can hand hold, but for me it isn't to much worse than carrying the 70-200mm II. The IQ is a very noticeable step up from the other lenses you own.
4. 400mm F/2.8 Forget this one unless you shoot pro sports. I have never seen a situation that I thought I would like to be carrying that thing around. There are better lenses for wildlife. Go with a 500mm II or a 600mm II for wildlife, more reach and IQ second to none. I have been to races, kids ball games, pro games and many other events in the last few years. Most pro events wouldn't allow a fan to carry it in. It would have been to long for the kids games.

Good Luck
Rick

[Andy Stringer]

Welcome to the forum, Chris. That's a nice collection of glass you have already. You don't say which camera(s) you are using (full-frame or crop?).

I have the 14mm and it's an excellent lens, but it's rare that I find a good opportunity to use it. Landscape shots can be quite difficult to compose without including your feet or some other unwanted detail in the frame. I often find, after cropping out these details, that I could have got the same shot with the 16-35 II. If you have the original 16-35 you might notice more or an upgrade in image quality but if you have the 16-35 II, stick with it for the versatility.

I have never used the 200 2.0L, but I did once borrow the older 200 1.8L. It produced great images but I was mostly using it at f/5.6 or f/8 since there was plently of light available. Unless you need the wider aperture, I'd say your 70-200 2.8 has this covered with much greater versatility at a fraction of the weight.

I have the 300 2.8 L IS (not the new II). I agree that the 300 II will give you better quality and speed than the 70-300 and should be hand holdable. It also has the benefit of being compatible with extenders, so I recommend getting a 1.4x and/or 2x extender if you opt for this lens. That would give you 420mm f/4 and/or 600mm f/5.6 for a fraction of the cost and weight of the longer primes.

I have never used a 400 2.8, but I have held one briefly and concluded that it would be too big and heavy to use without a tripod or monopod. Unless you need to get to 800mm with extenders, or you need 400mm at f/2.8, I recommend the 300mm + 1.4x extender.

[Swiss]

@all thx for you responses and the welcomes!

@Andy I use a 5DMKII but upgrading to a 1D X soon. But all FF for sure.

@HDnitehawk: great comment. I think that is pretty much what I hoped for. The 300 or the 400 are those I am leaning towards. And probably 300 is good enough for most of the apllications I have. And for the rare wildlife occasions a TC will do just fine. The 400 is to mich of a beast for me. The pros should try to tame her but not me!

So the 300 it is. I'll just wait for the 1D X to arrive and than I am going to post some impressions of this combo!

Cheers
Chris

[FastGass]

My choice if you were going for sports would be the 300mm f/2.8 II or if you are really ambitious the 400mm f/2.8 II. The latter could double as a decent wildlife lens as well. But if you are more into wildlife or birds (like I am) the 500mm II, 600mm II or best of all the 800mm gem. All of which would be much better options.

John.

[jrw]

I guess the big question is what you might be planning to use a new lens for?

If you do use the long end of the 70-300 enough, and don't feel the need to go longer, then a 300mm prime would be an excellent addition. Use the new version myself. It loves the 1.4x TC. For carrying and handholding, the 300 with TC is a LOT lighter than the the new 400mm. The new 500mm is 1.5 pounds lighter than the 400mm as well if you want even more reach. Might be pushing a lot of peoples limits to handhold for a while though. If a little more budget conscious the 300 f4 is a nice lens as well, and a lot lighter.

Your equipment list doesn't specify whether the 100 mm lens is the macro or not. Is that an area that holds any interest?

[neuroanatomist]

A TS-E lens is missing from your lineup...

[Richard Lane]

Hi Chris and welcome,

You have a very nice Line-up there! It's hard to recommend a lens when we don't know exactly what your needs are. But, if you're interested in getting into more sports and wildlife, then the 300mm f/2.8L IS II on Full Frame is a little short. Certainly, I like the idea of adding the 1.4X and/or 2X as stated above. I have a 300mm f.2.8L IS version 1 and I almost always have the 1.4X on it, and I'm using a MKIV which is a 1.3 crop for 546mm. The 400mm f/2.8 II is still a baby beast and I probably wouldn't recommend that one for you either.

You have the 70-300mm for walking around and the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II does take the 1.4X pretty well for 98-280mm f/4L IS II.

How about the Phantom 200-400mm f/4L IS with built-in 1.4X Extender. Some people feel that it will weigh about the same as the Nikon 200-400 f/4 (7.4 lbs) and others feel that it may weigh similar to the new Canon 500mm f/4L IS II (7 lbs). If these estimations are true, then that would put the weight at around 7 lbs. plus it would give you some nice flexibility in the longer focal ranges.

I know it's not available yet, but Canon did officially announce it's development last year, and as we know they have had a lot on their plate lately.

Here is a shot of it in the field:

http://blog.apertureacademy.com/2012/01/canon-200-400mm-and-600mm-prototype.html

More Info Here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-200-400mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Extender-1.4x-Lens-Review.aspx


I think that lens would look very nice on your new 1DX, if you can wait for it.

Come on, you know you want it!

Rich

[HDNitehawk]

Rich; I think you should give him good investment advice as well, it may take years before we see the 200-400mm and Chris should at least be collecting interest on his money.

This was the last announcement I read on the 200-400mm. If any one else has a more recent update we would like to see it;


"The Canon EF 200-400mm f/4 L IS USM Ext 1.4x Lens was originally expected to be (formally) announced on February 07, 2011 and scheduled for release later this year. This launch has also been delayed indefinitely. A release date for this lens will be announced when it is known."


The announcement was posted by Bryan on November 16th, 2011.