I will be upgrading soon. I shoot pretty much anything. the 2.8 seems like it would take better pictures w/ convt than the new 70-300w4.5-5.6. the 2.8 just seems that it would be a much more useful for allaround use. thanks guys
Printable View
I will be upgrading soon. I shoot pretty much anything. the 2.8 seems like it would take better pictures w/ convt than the new 70-300w4.5-5.6. the 2.8 just seems that it would be a much more useful for allaround use. thanks guys
The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is a great lens, and delivers very good IQ when used with a 1.4x extender; however, at 280/300mm, the 70-300 L will have a slight edge. The 70-200 II is also, large, heavy, and expensive. It is more versatile in that it's great for portraits, etc., but it's a lot of lens to carry around. Still...I love mine!
I am going to reinforce something Neuro said "but it's a lot of lens to carry around" and I love mine as well. The 70-200mm II is a brick that takes great pictures. In its range you won't beat it. But every time I take it out...I am reminded the thing is a brick.Quote:
Originally Posted by perk1961
You said all around pictures. The 70-300mm L is a more compact lens, and as such does not draw as much attention. I am sure fellow forum member SteveU will give you his input on the lens, as some of his Zombie pictures have been exceptional and I think the lens would be wonderful for street type work, probably more so than the 70-200mm because it would be a less noticed and not draw as much attention. I think if you want a compact lens the 70-300mm L might be a good choice. Occasionally I have thought of buying one myself.
I've own both the I and II versions of the 70-200 IS and yes there is a difference in weight. Perceivable - no. Compactness of the 70-300 would be nice but you will be giving up f/stops.
The white lenses tend to draw attention anywhere. For those that know them, it is because they know them. For those that don't, it is because it is something they aren't accustomed to seeing.
I shoot with a 5d Mark II. IMHO I would give up the distance to gain the 2.8 because I can utilize the quality of the pixels to crop if necessary.
+1 on what Thom had to say.
I love the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. It's an amazing lens and I don't mind having to carry around the weight if I can be confident my pictures will be sharp and in focus every time (5D Mark II limiting). It's a joy to use on a full frame camera, and I actually like the weight.
I use it with the 2x teleconverter III and to be honest getting good results are hit and miss. Sometimes a shot will come out spot on and other times it's a little soft. I'd suggest the results would be much better with the 1.4x converter.
It's always handy having a fixed aperture lens (especially a telephoto fixed at f/2.8), especially when shooting in manual as you're not adjusting for aperture changes with focal length.