|
All images © Bob Atkins
This website is hosted by:
|
 Author
|
Topic: I think I made a mistake - 70-200mm 2.8L IS (Read 8968 times)
|
TNLisa
Newbie
Posts: 2
|
Call me crazy, but I bought the 70-200mm 2.8L IS and now I think I want to return it. I just got it yesterday but have taken several shots - IT IS HEAVY and honestly, I don't see myself traveling with this lens, or even toting it around for random shots. It's huge.
I have the 40D, 17-55mm 2.8 IS, and the 85mm 1.8 --- so I am looking for a versatile zoom, but a somewhat practical one in terms of size and weight. I am a freelance photographer and shoot everything from my own kid's activities (soccer, horseback riding, dance recitals) to outdoor senior portaits and an occasional wedding. I do not do this FULL TIME for income, so that is why I really can't even justify keeping the 2.8L for those "occasional" shoots.
Please recommend a zoom lens that would meet my needs (better)...
Thank you so much.
Lisa
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 09, 2008, 06:51:02 PM by TNLisa »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Atkins
|
The EF 70-200/4L IS USM would seem to be the obvious choice. Smaller and lighter (and cheaper) than the f2.8 version, but it has IS, is solidly built and it's very sharp. The EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS USM would also be a possible choice. It's a little slower (in lens speed and focus), but has a wider range. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 09, 2008, 11:53:15 PM by Bob Atkins »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TNLisa
Newbie
Posts: 2
|
Thanks Bob -
I know that you use the 70-300mm IS lens --- why did you personally pick that one over the 70-200 f/4LIS?
For me it will be between these two...just really want to make a good decision (so I don't have to make another return).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Atkins
|
I chose the 70-300IS because it's half the price and since I like to shoot wildlife, the extra reach is valuable to me. I know I could put a TC on the 70-200/4L IS, but that takes time and it's something else to carry.
The 70-300IS is also slightly smaller and slighly lighter than the 70-200/4L IS, though there's not a huge difference.
The downsides of the 70-300 are the fact that it doesn't have a ring USM, so focus is a little slower, it can't take the Canon TCs, the front element rotates during focusing and there's no option for a tripod mount. Constuction, while pretty solid, isn't as good as on the "L" lens.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
