Canon + Lens = Major Brain Ache!

J

john182rs

Messages
345
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Right, well i know one thing is i will be buying a Canon 50D as my first camera, i have used one for abit and find it more comfortable than some of the others but not as big as the 1d2 that people have been advising me to get.

SO comes the lens time.
Ive been looking at getting one of the following all in Canon L series.
70-200 F4
70-200 F4 IS
70-200 F2.8
70-200 F2.8 IS (mk1 and mk2)

Now i know ideally people have said the 2.8 is best in low lights but im also being told the f4 will be good and produce crisp images for such likes of pro ice hockey and outdoors.

So will the F4 be good or is it definatly have to be the 2.8, considering this is my first ever lens.

Next problem is, IF i go for the 2.8 what are the differences between the mk1 and mk2?
Will the mk1 be just as good as the mk2 or is the mk2 in a league of its own?

Now IS on both of the above double the value on each of the f4 and f2.8.
I am thinking the IS is a must as i have slightly shaky hands but will the 2.8 non is be quick enough so that i will at least get one crisp image in 20 that ive taken.

Budget wise im aiming for 1500 brand new or 2nd hand.
 
The IS wont help stop the action on the hockey rink but the f2.8 will. If you shoot a lot of portraits etc handheld then get the f2.8 IS as it will be fantastic for your hockey too. I believe the mk2 is superior but no-one was complaining about the mk1 until the mk2 came out. Save some dough and buy the mk1 unless image quality is crucial then the mk2 is the one for you. I wouldn't get either of the f4 L's if it's for fast moving indoor sports.
 
A deciding factor might be whether you can see yourself wanting to add a teleconverter to lengthen the lens at any point.

If you think you will - then on a 50D body you might want to consider one of the 'faster' 2.8 lenses.
 
f4 won't cut the mustard for indoor action photograph, you would need a minimum of f2.8, probably faster. As for the 50D, might (probably will) struggle at the higher ISO's especially if you go for the f4, and still might be a problem with the f2.8

As for the 70-200mm f2.8 MkI and II, the II is supposed to be sharper and will have the latest IS on the lens, the other difference is price and whether there are any 2nd hand MkII versions out there, because I think they'll be rare.

If your budget is £1500 for the lens and body, get some prime lenses, even if it isn't, you would still be better off getting a couple of primes like the 135mm f2, 100mm f2, the 200mm f2.8 or 85mm f1.8

Your best bet is to PM KIPAX and see what kit he uses as its one of the sports he covers, but your talking serious money for anything involving indoor action photograph
 
Are you thinking of just getting one of the above lenses or in addition to a more standard size too?
 
I tried with a 70 -300 sigma F/4 and it produces dark pictures at ice hockey even with the iso upto 3200 , ended up getting the F/2.8 sigma 70-200 ( canon 70-200 L is on the wish list ) and can now use it with iso 1600 an 1/500 shutter speed , idea for freezing the action
 
Im just thinking of buying one single lens with a budget of 1500 not including the camera.

Now this is yet where i struggle even more, I know the canons produce the better image but would sigmas be just as good.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Are you thinking of just getting one of the above lenses or in addition to a more standard size too?
Click to expand...
I was thinking that myself. I know the 70-200's are great (I have one) but they probably aren't the sort of lens you'd use every day - especially on a cropped sensor.

Maybe you'd be better off looking at a midrange zoom first?
 
The Canon 70-200 f2.8's will be better than the Sigma's. They are the top end zooms in the Canon line up. The Sigma 120-300 is supposed to be a cracking lens so maybe you could look at that as it will give you more reach for the hockey (not sure how far you'll be from the action). This lens is about £1k second hand. That would leave you enough for a standard zoom as i'm sure you'll need one sooner or later. You could probably pick up a second hand 24-105 f4L or a 17-55 f2.8 IS with your change. That would be a very nice combination.
 
This sounds crazy, can some one please chuck in some suggestions as to what lens to look for or at with a good capture rate.
 
get either the canon 70-200 f2.8 and one of the standard zooms i mentioned above or the sigma 120-300 f2.8 and one of the standard zooms and you'll be covered for almost all situations.
 
If you're going to do any sort of general photography, you will need some coverage lower than 70mm as on a 1.6x sensor (which is what the 50D is) you effectively multiply the focal length by 1.6 so a 70mm lens is equivalent to 112mm on a 35mm camera. You won't be able to do much landscape nor will you be able to do more general purpose stuff like family snaps with more than 1 person in it.

I overanalyse things tremendously, so I've found http://www.the-digital-picture.com/ very helpful in understanding lenses. They seem a tad Canon biased (and certainly the Tamron/Sigma lenses tend to come out worse in comparative tests) but the reviews do normally show a good set of comparisons between different lenses in the same focal length.

Personally, I use my 18-55 kit lens more than my 70-200 F4.

If indoor sport is your thing, I'd go for the 50D+17-85 kit lens as a general purpose walkabout lens (it will do you fine for 90% of things you want to do), then go for a good quality 70-200 or possibly longer with as large an aperture as possible. Image stabilisation is not going to help you at all for sport and a large zoom (particularly zoomed in) is hard going to take good photos handheld.

You're spending a lot of money - you should do it once (no matter how tempting those sexy lenses are)

HTH...
 
What are you actually planning on shooting? I've just got a 5d but previously I had a cropped sensor camera. I had a 10-22, 17-55 f2.8 IS and a 70-200 f4L IS.

Of those I used the 17-55 the most by quite a large margin. You should be able to pick one up second hand for around £600. The 10-22 is about £400 used and the 70-200 about £650-700 used. If you dropped down to the non-IS version of the 70-200 you have a complete set of very good lenses for £1400. Indeed I'm selling my 10-22 and 17-55 on ebay right now (not enough posts to sell here).
 
Last edited:
john182rs ahve a word with janbokev also in this thread.. he has just got setup for ice hockey

f4 wont do.. you need at least f2.8 .. 70-200 will do fine.. if you can afford the canon L then get that for betetr quality and the ability to crop in more... if not then next choice at considerably less pennies would be the sigma 70-200

please ignore the kit lens advice above for ice hockey... sorry but...

where are you thinking of doing ice hockey?
 
Last edited:
I didn't see the ice hockey mentioned in the first post - sorry. Ever though of getting a fast prime instead of a zoom? The 200mm f2.8 is smaller, lighter, cheaper and less conspicuous than 70-200 zoom. Downsides - it doesn't zoom and doesn't have IS.
 
Kipax - Im looking to do ice hockey within the EIHL and know that most arenas close to the ice are well lit up.
I am not allowed to take photos in the Nottingham arena but all of the others have said i would be more than welcome to attend theirs, some of them have also said if the quality was good enough they would like to have some from me after inspection.

With the EIHL it would not be for a proffesion type photographs just for self use.
Im looking at taking photo's for some of the equestrian events that i go to.
My sister currently wanted to buy a small 6x9 photo and the guy wanted £40 for it.

So i could take photos of her with her own horse and then some of her mates for a little easy money and alot cheaper than they would.
But want some thing that i can get high quality when im off to motorsports and motor shows.
Im also looking on taking up a college/learners course.
 
seriously.. equestrian if indoors is worse than ice hockey...

you need f2.8 at least ..thats it.. no options
you need a camera with decent ISO
you dont really need IS

If you go anywhere near an f4 then you have lost...

sigma lens are good.. canon L is better

what else do you need to know? :)
 
Some of the Canon L primes are affordable. Depends how many lenses you want to carry and how often you want to be switching lenses.

- Canon 135mm f/2L (216mm on 1.6 crop)
- Canon 200mm f/2.8L mkII (320mm on 1.6 crop)

Small, black, light, discreet :)
 
Might be worth going for a 2nd hand 70-200 f4l and seeing how you get on. These are all physically big lenses, but especially the 2.8.

Because the resale values are so strong if buying used in the first place you can always trade up if/when you need to.
 
pearce_jj said:
Might be worth going for a 2nd hand 70-200 f4l and seeing how you get on. .
Click to expand...

seriously? given the advice from other ice hockey photogrpahers that he should go for f2.8 can you explain why you think he should go for f4? you must shoot in some bright ice hockey arenas is all i can think?
 
KIPAX said:
please ignore the kit lens advice above for ice hockey... sorry but...
Click to expand...
Umm... I think I'm the only one who mentioned a kit lens and the reason I mentioned it was to do everything else (NOT ice hockey). A 70mm lens on a APS-C sensor as your shortest focal length is going to stop you taking an awful lot of photos!
 
As previously mentioned. Indoor equestrian asks a lot from your kit. You'll need at least f2.8 and a body that'll handle ISO of 3200 +
You're gonna have to spend out on a good 70-200 2.8. You'll not need IS for Ice Hockey or Equestrian , although you might need it for general photography !
 
Ok some of the ice arenas i will be going to, this is just to show what kind of lighting they have.
I know some of the pictures are a little poo but you should be able to get the general idea here.

Nottingham.
during game
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1640000/images/_1641456_nottingham_ice300.jpg

Belfast.
http://www.odysseyarena.com/assets/_files/images/feb_07/bel__1171562473_Odyssey-arena-ice-hockey.jpg

Sheffield.
Off a blackberry
http://www.flickr.com/photos/41208557@N07/3811565259

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...terior.JPG/300px-Sheffield_Arena_interior.JPG

Coventry.
All Lights
http://www.cwn.org.uk/tourism/skydome/images/john-neville-w400.jpg
Half light
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8e/SkyDome3.jpg

Hull.
Half Lit.
http://www.hullcc.gov.uk/pls/xximages/docs/inside_arena.jpg

Sorry i did mean outdoor equestrian as in cross country, show jumping (outdoors) and when on the drag hunts to capture everyone in their gear.
 
Last edited:
trevorbray said:
As previously mentioned. Indoor equestrian asks a lot from your kit. You'll need at least f2.8 and a body that'll handle ISO of 3200 +
You're gonna have to spend out on a good 70-200 2.8. You'll not need IS for Ice Hockey or Equestrian , although you might need it for general photography !
Click to expand...

KIPAX - im taking in what youve said, it hurts my brain but finally im being told what i need to hear and not what i wanted to hear.

I personally am now looking for a mk2 2.8 70-200 none IS if IS is going to be no use during zoom. Seeing as im buying this none IS one from jessops at the same time with everything else i will try and get either a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 MK2 for free out of them or the equivlant price off this Canon EF 28mm f2.8

Dependant on which you lot think is better.

I do now know that it will have to be a f2.8 plus the 50d has an ISO range up to 12800 so the 50d should be good yea?
 
john182rs said:
I personally am now looking for a mk2 2.8 70-200 none IS
Click to expand...

I don't think there is a Mk2 for the non-IS lens. But the Mk1 is definitely what you want.

Although the 50D will shoot at ISO12800 you'll probably not be happy with the multi-coloured snowstorm effect. But you should still be able to get decent results at lower ISOs.
 
hollis_f said:
I don't think there is a Mk2 for the non-IS lens. But the Mk1 is definitely what you want.

Although the 50D will shoot at ISO12800 you'll probably not be happy with the multi-coloured snowstorm effect. But you should still be able to get decent results at lower ISOs.
Click to expand...

OK.

Anyone got a 50D with either of the lens's thats been mentioned within an indoor situation.
 
I would be very, very tempted to go for a 7D rather than a 50D. This sort of thing is more or less the usage it is designed for. If you were spending £1500 on a lens a second hand 70-200 2.8 should only set you back £1k or less, so I would put the rest of the money into the camera.

As said above, get a lens for more general use too. The 70-200 will be a massive pain in lots of situations.
 
KIPAX said:
seriously? given the advice from other ice hockey photogrpahers that he should go for f2.8 can you explain why you think he should go for f4? you must shoot in some bright ice hockey arenas is all i can think?
Click to expand...

It's just my suggestion - this is what I read from this thread:


i will be buying a Canon 50D as my first camera...
Im looking to do ice hockey within the EIHL and know that most arenas close to the ice are well lit up...not for a proffesion type photographs just for self use...
Im looking at taking photo's for...equestrian events...My sister currently wanted to buy a small 6x9 photo and the guy wanted £40 for it. So i could take photos of her with her own horse and then some of her mates...
But want some thing that i can get high quality when im off to motorsports...
equestrian as in cross country, show jumping (outdoors)...


Hence as starting out this is why I would consider getting a 2nd hand f4l for maybe £400 and seeing how it goes. If the OP then decides to go for the 2.8 it should be resalable at almost no loss. On the other hand if it proves OK then that's £1,000 saved towards bag, standard zoom, tripod, flashes, computer, whatever :)

FWIW I also think the last couple of posts are really good advice, I went without a normal zoom for far too long. Having eventually plumped for a 'cheap' tammy I'm very happy with it for my use on that focal range.

Another option is to get the body with a normal kit zoom and hire the 70-200 2.8 and f4 versions before making a decision. The size and weight of the 2.8 put me off using mine often because I can't be bothered to lug it about, but the images it can produce at 2.8 are simply stunning.

HTH :)
 
Well looking at what ^^ Pearce JJ has said i might look at buying the 7d then hire an f4 to see how that goes then another time hire a f2.8 and compare the two but mean time play with a basic lens and try to get upto grips.
This way i will be able to get used to the camera and its bits with setup then bug brother in law to borrow his lens's till i can save for a 2.8 of my own an most prob have to buy janurary feburary next year.

Does this sound more reasonable or am i still talking doo dar..?
 
If you can afford it, go for the F2.8.

I've got the F4 because I don't have the money for the F2.8 :)
 
This is my problem, i can either have a 2nd mk 2.8 with IS for around £1500 or £1000 with no IS and the Canon 50D.
OR the Canon 7D with a much smaller lens and buy a 2.8 next year.

The price difference between the 7d and 50d are around £500, this difference would then cut in to my lens budget.
 
It's not clear what your budget in total is. I'll assume £2k plus or minus a bit. If you're really into sports and need the best tracking autofocus system, it appears the 7D is a good step up compared to the 50D. In that case, I'd get 7D, 70-200 2.8 mk1 (no IS as you need shutter speed to freeze any motion and IS doesn't give you that) and a cheapo 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS kit lens second hand (~£80). The kit lens is "good enough" to keep you happy with general snapping until you can afford something better at that focal range.

IMHO, for your stated aim of indoor sports photo, you need a good autofocus system and wide aperture (with no IS) with as long a focal length as you can afford. Compromising will cause you grief in one way or the other...
 
It is more or less what I said on the last page, but I definitely agree with the above.
 
Right, so to get my budget out there so people know.
This is how I looked at it, up to £1000 for a camera, up to £1000 for a lens then £500 for accessories.
With a 50D being £699 I could put another £300 towards a lens, my accessories have come down by £117 just by getting eBay deals and possibly even more by buy from people on here soon in another 31 posts.

Canon 50D £699.
INS for 3yr £88.
Bag £59.
CF Card £89
S/Battery £35
Body Cap £3.50
UV Filter £27
Total === £1000.5

Canon 70-200 f4 L £549

Total === £1549.50
1549.50 + 450 (1999.5) for a 70-200 2.8 L

Canon 7D £1199
INS for 3yr £129
Bag £59
CF Card £89
S/Battery £125
Body Cap £3.50
UV Filter £27
Total === £1631.50

Canon 70-200 f4 L £549

Total === £2180.50

2180.50 + 450 (2630.50) for the 70-200 2.8 L

Difference between the 50D and the 7D is £631.50
Insurance on each of the lens's are about £125, I will be having the insurance because on some thing this high cost IF I dropped it then I know its covered for 3 years instead of having to pay up another X amount of cash for a new one.

£2000 was the highest that I wanted to go, but now looking doing a little over time and selling a few bits and bobs I have I think I could get the extra 600 for brand new kit.

Then the other thing is if I buy some of it 2nd hand then again I save even more.
I’ve seen both batteries for less than £10/£25 which are saving £25/£100. If I get the memory card else where, yet again saving more money with an average of £45.
Buying a bag else where as well saves another £30-£40 with most things on there I could save, if I got a lens 2nd hand I wouldn’t have insurance so that could save £125+ just not having ins.

So 2nd accessories I could save est. £225 on the 50D and £335 on the 7D.

Obv I could save more dependant on who and what I buy from here, I’m sure your lot can guess which wanted thread I might be posting (I’m not breaking rules mods, just stating what I might be doing) when the time comes.
 
From here:

Photoguard Select insurance is suitable for:
Amateur or semi professional photographers who earn less than 50% of their income through photography or related activities.


Photoguard Select provides:
Cover against theft and accidental damage up to £25,000

Replacement on a new for old basis (vintage and rare items are covered by valuation - laptops are subject to depreciation)

Hire cover until items are replaced or repaired (subject to an approved claim)

No excess as standard (a voluntary excess will reduce your premium)

Choice of area covered: from UK only, UK and EU with 30 days worldwide, or full worldwide
Photoguard Select options:
In vehicle cover to protect you whilst on the road

Public liability up to £1m – essential for active photographers

Personal accident cover – up to £5,000
Photoguard PRO insurance is suitable for:
photographers who earn more than 50% of their income through photography or related activities (excludes working in a photographic retail store).
Photographers who have high value equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top