Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Lee
I am looking to expand on my lens collection, which at the moment consists solely of a 50mm 1.8 mkII (which is an awesome lens, btw).


I'd like a lens for mostly for street portraits as well as a little sports and movement action. The 70-200 focal length suits me well, but I can't decide between the f4 with IS and the f2.8 without IS.


Ideally I'd like to leave the tripod at home (it makes you so much moreconspicuouswhen trying to take candid shots). Would the faster aperture make up for the lack of IS? Or will IS allow me to go to slower shutter speeds and get more light in that way? The shallower DOF of the 2.8 is also attractive.

...to stop action, you would need a shutterspeed of 1/125 or such minimum, but for a candid portrait 1/30 to 1/60 might do, meaning the 4x IS of the 70-200F4IS might come handy. And since it is 'candid' you will be relative further away, leaning more to the 200mm end, so a decent bokeh/separation from the background should be possible/achievable with the F4...


In addition to a long lens, I would also like some wide angle glass for architecture and urban landscapes. I've tried a friends 17-40 L and its very nice indeed, the wide end seems wide enough for me. For those that have the 10-22, is it too wide for some uses or is the smaller focal range ok? The flexibility of having a wider zoom range seems worthwhile.




The 10-22 is optically as nice as the 17-40, almost equally build [] It is the perfect 'specialist' lens for the two applications you describe (architecture and -urban- landscape), and can be used with good results for 'street' too (at the 20 to 22 end, otherwise peoples features get distorted [] ). And if you are fine with buying EF-S lenses: the extra range, IS and speed of the EF-S 17-55F2.8 IS - as compared with the 17-40F4L - might be worthwhile investigating []





...€0.02...





Kindest regards!





Max@Home