View Single Post
      04-30-2012, 05:01 PM   #3182
DARK_M3
Banned
33
Rep
1,294
Posts

 
Drives: 08 E90, 89 Grand Wagoneer
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: So Cal

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy734 View Post
nice gear!

The 135mm f/2L is an amazing lens... one of the best that Canon makes. If you see yourself using that focal length, I highly recommend it (I wish I had one).

The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is an awesome lens. If it isn't the Mark II version, then I recommend stepping down to the 70-200mm f/4L IS, assuming you don't need the f/2.8 aperture. It's one of my favorite lenses and it's significantly lighter than the f/2.8s, and much cheaper. Whichever you decide on, make sure you get the IS version... it makes handheld shooting much easier.
I thought about the f/4L IS. My only concern is that since I use a 50D as opposed to say, the 5D MkIII, will it be a wise choice given the limited ISO performance as noted by dcstep? In other words, will I need the faster f/2.8 mated up with my current bodies?

It would be nice to save the money by getting the f/4L IS and putting the extra money towards a new body fund. I'm thinking 5D MkIII or 7D. But that might be a ways off.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dcstep View Post
I'm partial to the 70-200mm Ls, either the f/2.8 and the f/4, which I own.

Your three bodies are showing their age and you're missing out on the high-ISO performance of the last two generations. I'd institute a long range plan to buy a 5D MkIII. I'd sell the two oldest bodies and buy the f/4 70-200mm to save some money and take advantage of the high-ISO performance of the MkIII.

Seeing your investment in fast primes, I suspect you'll find my suggestion uncomfortable, to up the ISO performance of you body and go with a slower lens. When I bought my 5D MkII in late 2008 it changed my whole perspective towards fast primes vs. slower zooms.

It's only money...

Dave
Agreed on the bodies showing their age. I understand completely about going with the slower zoom and mating it up to the faster body in the future. It's not such an uncomfortable idea as my primes will work just that much better with more up to date body. I guess the f/4 70-200 just makes better long term sense in my case.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vachss View Post
Yow, 3 bodies. I thought I was going overboard when I carried around 2. I guess if you're on assignment and need absolute reliability....
Overkill yes. Truth be told I gave that 20D to my wife along with the Tamron 18-200 to shoot around with. So those are actually currently blank spots in the bag. I like the idea of having a secondary body just in case but honestly, the 50D is pretty reliable and I don't really shoot photojournalism so I really don't need the extra hardware.