I need some help deciding which 70-200mm lens to get. I'm a college student so money is a bit tight at the moment. Right now I have about $1,000 saved up for a lens. My question is should I just get the f/4 non IS version now? Or save some more for the f/4 IS or save even more for the f/2.8 non IS or f/2.8 IS. And then if I got the f/2.8 IS should I go new or old version?
I have a T2i and shoot a lot of sports and portraits.
Don
I voted for the f/4 IS. It's optically excellent (better than either of the the non-IS versions), and the IS can be a big help, especially with portraits where the shutter speeds can get lower than easy hand-holding speeds at the long end. Note that I'm assuming outdoor sports and outdoor portraits. If you'll be using it indoors for either application, you'e be better off with a prime. The 85mm f/1.8 makes an excellent lens for indoor sports and tight portraits on a crop body, and is easy on the budget (one of the best values in the Canon lineup, IMO).
Outdoor portraits and about half indoor sports and half outdoor, basketball, volleyball, football, and soccer. And I also can
Baker,
Just a few quick questions regarding your sports photography. Are your sports indoor or outdoor? Low light or plenty of light? Subjects near or far?
Also I was wondering what other lenses do you already have? I remember you posted before but I am having trouble with this website and my phone right now.
Thanks
Brant
Oops. Sorry. It looks like you answered most of my questions while I was writing.
<span style="font-size: small;"]Originally Posted by Baker
<span style="font-size: small;"]Baker, Another thought on this would be the 135 F2L here are the pros and cons:
<span style="font-size: small;"]Pros:
<span style="font-size: small;"]1. Optically excellent---hard to beat this one with anything under $4k
<span style="font-size: small;"]2. Great portrait lens--especially if you are outside and have a little room to work with
<span style="font-size: small;"]3. Fast, would work well with indoor court sports and poor lighting conditions
<span style="font-size: small;"]4. In your price range.
<span style="font-size: small;"]5. Fast and accurate focus
<span style="font-size: small;"]6. Would be ideal for field sports in the red zone or 20 yards of the goal.
<span style="font-size: small;"]7. This lens is just a "sexy beast"
<span style="font-size: small;"]Cons:
<span style="font-size: small;"]1. Non IS
<span style="font-size: small;"]2. Not a zoom, so therefore not as versatile
<span style="font-size: small;"]3. Limited reach (only about 216mm on your camera) so the opposite end of the football or soccer field would be a bust.
<span style="font-size: small;"]I also agree with John (Neuro)--The 85 1.8 is also a strong contender for your stated needs.
<span style="font-size: small;"]Bob
<span style="font-size: small;"]
Bob
The 85mm f/1.8 sounds like a good fit for those purposes.
The 70-200mm f/4L would be great for outdoor sports, but indoors f/4 is not going to cut it unless you can also rig the venue with a set of external flashes with wireless triggers. Even f/2.8 is about the narrowest you'd want to maintain reasonable shutter speeds needed for sports in the poor lighting of most gyms.
The f/4 zoom would be good for outdoor portraits (where you have room to back up a little but still be close enough for long focal length + close enough to subject to give you good isolation. The wider aperture of a prime allows you to do that from closer to the subject (and will give you shallower DoF in general).
The other often-discussed lens for these purposes is the 135mm f/2L. The issue there is that the longer focal length on a crop body means you're pretty far from the subject. With a 135L on a crop body, to get a full-body portrait of a 5'8" tall person (in portrait orientation), you'd need to be 35 feet from the subject. If you're only planning on tight shots or know you'll have a lot of room, the 135L is a good choice, but for portraits it's really more suited to a FF body. For shooting sports indoors, though, especially from the stands, the 135L is an excellent option.
A 3rd lens in this class is the 100mm f/2 - it's nearly a twin to the 85mm f/1.8 except for the 15mm and 1/3 stop difference, and thus a compromise between the 85mm f/1.8 and the 135mm f/2L (but closer to the 85mm in price).
Of those three - 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2L - I'd still recommend the 85mm f/1.8. I loved mine when I had it, and took some portraits with my T1i that I really liked. I liked the focal length so much on the crop body that I replaced it with the 85mm f/1.2<span style="color: #ff0000;"]L II (a great lens, but optically the 85/1.8 is close, the non-L lens focuses faster which is a plus for sports, and it's 1/5 the cost). The 100mm is ok for portraits, but even the 85mm on a crop body is best for tighter portraits (you still need to be ~22 feet from a 5'8" subject for a full body portrait shot with the 85mm lens), but you can probably make that work outdoors. 100mm would be a little harder. The T2i has a lot of pixels to crop from, so that will help the 85mm on the courts/fields, but conversely, if your lens isn't wide enough, sometimes you just cannot back up.
Given the prices, you could get the 85mm f/1.8 (or the 50mm f/1.4) for your portraits the 70-200mm f/4L non-IS for outdoor sports and still be within (or nearly so) your current budget. [6]
Oh I like the way you think. Now I must decide if I want the 135 f/2L or the 85 f/1.8 and 70-200 f/4L non IS......
no mater which prime you will pick, it's most likely you are not going to like the zoom any more after you see the results from one of these two primes, apertures wider than f2.8 is a different world IMO, it just has more fun to play with those fast primes, they are lighter, smaller, faster, sharper, better isolation, better bokeh and hey! they are cheaper. I think every Canon dslr user should have a 85mm1.8 and if you can afford , the 135mm 2.0 is even better.( in terms of IQ,I'm not counting the focal length you may need though).
another thing you may need to think about is that since you will shoot a lot of sports, you should think about getting a XXD/7D instead. rebels are very good bodies, but they are too slow for catching the action of sports.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote