Thanks for the info, but even with the reduction in price, it's beyond my budget currently. I finally went and bought a ES-F 55-250 IS lens yesterday since I was going crazy reading posts, reviews etc and couldn't take it any longer. Hope my decision was good.... will know only after I take pictures. Thanks guys for your advise & help. Now that am a member, will be with you guys. Cheers!!!
Originally Posted by atulmehta1000
Congratulations, I hope you'll like it! And I'm pretty sure you will. It will help you make some great photos. Be thankful that you haven't experienced the L-disease yet. Once you go L, you don't want anything else and it gets very and I mean very expensive [:P]
<div>
Probably the best idea. You're falling right in the marketing gap between normal lenses and most L and more professional lenses...(the 70-200 f4L is an exception)
And I doubt if the f2.8 will be a good choice for you. The f4L is sharp from f4 on. The f2.8L is a bit softer, so often you'd want to push it one stop anyway. It does let in one stop(two times) as much light, but if you don't really need it...
Good luck, Jan
Ps: indoors f2.8 could be better than f4 from time to time, but you'll see that even f2.8 lacks in a lot of circumstances. So you're going to pop up a flash anyways. Also keep in mind that you're talking about hand-held shots indoors. With a focal length of 200mm, f2.8 makes it easier than f4, but you'll still need quite a shutterspeed to correct for your own motion. General rule 1/320 sec minimum for steady handheld shots at 200mm...Of course it's just a rule and with more steady hands, you might get to 1/160th of a second or something, but for inside that's also quite hard to achieve. The 70-200 f4L IS could help you out better for those shots I think. It has more advantage inside I think than the 70-200 f2.8L non-IS.
</div>
I've thought about possibly even upgrading to the f/4 IS lens, but it seems like a senseless use of money as I rarely seem to have any problems handheld. And I've almost always got my tripod with me, so if need be I can just throw my body onto that.
Thanks guys, you've been a ton of help! And certainly saved me money!
@atul;
Sheiky's right, L-lenses are an addiction. ;P
-Zach
I've thought about possibly even upgrading to the f/4 IS lens, but it seems like a senseless use of money as I rarely seem to have any problems handheld. And I've almost always got my tripod with me, so if need be I can just throw my body onto that.
I know, but this was mainly for indoors comparison vs the f2.8 non-IS version. I know that IS on these focal lengths can be very welcome, although if you do bring a tripod anyway I guess it's indeed a waste of money for 9/10 situations.
Jan
No, I haven't got the 'L' disease and hope that I do not get it ever, cause 'that' disease is just .....tooooooooo exxxxppppeeennnsssiiivvveeeeeeeeee!!!!
I feel that Canon have jacked up the prices of the 'L' lens ( as compared to the normal lenses) knowing that they give good results and that people are hooked onto it. I guess it's the 'Demand/Supply' scenario...... in this case 'Demand/Price.
Haha I got my disease pretty much under control...at least I think so, sometimes I do have to calm my mind a bit though [:P]
The best advice I can give you is: show everyone that you can make superb images without needing an L-lens. It boosts your creativity and your photos improve a lot. Just remember that an L-lens doesn't make great photos without a good photographer [H]
If you enjoy what you do it's often shown in the photos you make, so enjoy your lens as much as you can!
Totally agree with you that a photographer makes good photos and not the lens. My basic nature is to tackle the difficult............ in this case get good pictures with 'plebeian' lens. That's where creativity comes in use!!Thanks. Am sure to enjoy the lens.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote