Lenses on the way!

[neuroanatomist]

Good choices, Brendan.


Got 'em yet? When you do, let us know your first (and second) impressions!

[mikehillman89]

Mine's faster than a rocket! 1.5 meters to infinity in about 1 second. [img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

BAM! In your face!

[Brendan7]

Yep, my 70-200 f/4L IS arrived yesterday (17-55 in a week or so). It's frickin' awesome! When using f/2.8 indoors with the 70-200 f/4 I found myself using very low ISOs a lot; and decided what the heck I'd just bump the ISO a bit instead of spending $1500 more. It's also half the weight which is VERY nice. I'll post some pictures when as I take them .

[mikehillman89]

What body are you using? It'd be interesting to know if I could bump the ISO and avoid the extra cost as well.

[Brendan7]

What body are you using? It'd be interesting to know if I could bump the ISO and avoid the extra cost as well.

I use the 7D. It's not the best lowlight body but I find it to be superb from ISO 800-1600 and it's tons better than xxD bodies, which have significant noise at ISO 800.


I know f/2.8 is nice, but I realized that usually I'd be shooting at ISO 100-400 and a fast(er) shutter speed and so decided that I could bump ISO (I use ISO 320-640 using f/4) and b/c of 4-stop IS I could use a slower shutter speed if necessary. Plus, it's half the weight and $1500 less expensive!

[mikehillman89]

Good to know! I'll be picking my 7D up on Saturday and my next hunt would probably be for a 70-200 so it's good to know what others think about bumping the ISO instead of spending money on what could be another lens...

[neuroanatomist]

Ahhh but theEF 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: red;"]LIS II USM is such a sweet lens. Sure, it's twice the cost of the f/4L IS, and twice the weight...but soooo sweet. []


I've found myself using it frequently at daybreak and twilight, when myEF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6<span style="color: red;"]LIS USM is just too slow.


The f/2.8L IS MkII has an extra 'real' stop, and an extra stop of IS rating, meaning shots of still subjects effectively two stops faster than with the f/4L IS. I've got late twilight shots at 200mm and 1/13 s (already at ISO 3200) with the MkII, which wouldn't have been possible with the f/4 lens(I'm not about to go to ISO 6400 or 12800!!).


The other factor (for me) is that the f/2.8 does very well with a 1.4x teleconverter, yielding a 98-280 f/4 IS zoom that delivers great IQ and is weather sealed. The f/4L IS doesn't hold up optically as well to an extender, and it's also f/5.6 with the 1.4x.


But, having said that, the f/4L IS is a great lens, and at twice the cost, you are definitely paying a huge premium for that one stop of aperture. Then again, it's only 2 times the cost - not 5 times the cost like the 85mm f/1.2L that I'm considering, vs. the 85mm f/1.8...

[Brendan7]

Ahhh but theEF 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color:red;"]LIS II USM is such a sweet lens.

Having used both, I decided making do on <i style="text-decoration: underline;"]some[/i]occasions (I do not feel limited by f/4, even in dark indoor rooms especially w/ a flash) rather than spending $1500 more.

[neuroanatomist]

spending $1500 more

"The more we pay, the better we like it, see?"


--Amanda (Katharine Hepburn) in Adam's Rib


[:P]

[Brendan7]

spending $1500 more

"The more we pay, the better we like it, see?"


--Amanda (Katharine Hepburn) in Adam's Rib


[img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]

sometimes.