Canon 70-200 2.8 vs 200mm 2.8

GooGaBu

GooGaBu

Messages
1,457
Edit My Images
Yes
Been looking through the internet for view on this - and thought to ask the question over here as well.

Basically - I have the 70-200 f2.8 MKII, and do love the lens and don't see anything wrong with it (read : Happy with the pictures :-) )
Now - there are few jobs where a 200mm prime would be the only focal length that I would be using. So the question to anyone who has used the lenses or just the prime.
Do you think the image quality (at about f4) would be worth getting the 200mm f2.8 for those jobs??
These jobs do pay well enough - so it's not that much a question of budget, but whether the image quality makes it worth it??
If the quality is similar/same - then I see no point in the extra purchase, but if there is difference in the quality, might look into getting one.

I do have 200mm f1.8 - but that is too heavy for these jobs.. so not an option to use it.

Any views/comments are much appreciated :-)
 
There's little to choose between the 200/2.8 and the 70-200/2.8 as far as IQ goes when you look at real world shots and especially at f/4. I sold my 70-200 when I got the 200/2 but I keep a 200/2.8 as a lighter weight option if needed. In short, I'm not sure that the 200/2.8 would add anything except a little portability....the zoom is quite remarkable for a zoom.

Bob
 
Thanks - that's pretty much what my search around the web has come up with as well..
The portability would be the one benefit - but then again, there are jobs where I might still need to carry the 70-200 with me..
Thanks for taking time to reply with your thoughts!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top