Help! ~ your views on a 70-200 f2.8

Lev67

Lev67

Messages
815
Name
Neil
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,
Just need your opinions on a 70-200 f2.8..
For my 400D but will also be changing that soon to a 40D..
I know probably that the Canon one tops it, but what about the Sigma and Tamron??
Images would be great to see from your lens..
Doesn't need to have IS, just need a fast focus..
Thanks in advance
 
Hi, I see you've got quite a range already..., what are you looking for in this purchase?
 
I've started shooting a few football matches. Cant quite afford a 300 f2.8. ;)
I was using the 100-400, but struggled with the light plus the DOF.
Tried the 300 f4 but was too close
Plus would make a better walkabout lens than the 100-400 I think..
 
Canon 40D
Canon 70-200mm 2.8 L IS
1/800th
f4.5
Focal Length 200mm

Straight out the camera with a little sharpen! (y)


img5826xj6.jpg
 
I hired the Canon non IS version from Lensesforhire.co.uk it is a cracking lens and I want to buy one now!!!
 
Just a thought, have you considered getting a body with better high ISO performance, seems unfortunate to dupe a lot of the range of the 100-400L thats all.
 
I am not a Canon person, that aside .. I believe a 70-200 f2.8 should be a "must have" for any kit bag.

It's excellent for portraits, fast enough for any action, gives good reach for wildlife ... basically, it's an allround perfect for every situation lens.

If you can get the Canon one, all the better; if not then the Sigma or any of the other brands come next in line in terms of image quality.

Why hesitate?


I say this, and I am still agonising over having sold my 70-200VR (Nikon), even though I am unable to hand-hold it to get a really sharp image ... I still want one.
 
Hi Neil.

If it helps any, here's one from my holiday taken in the ships theater with my 70-200L non IS. It's been only been cropped and sharpened in Picasa, no noise reduction.

ISO 800, F2.8 and 1/500th @ 70mm (no flash).

As you know I'm very happy with mine (y).

IMG_0795.jpg
 
Canon 200mm f/2.8L mkII - it's a prime but if you can cope with the loss of zoom it's nearly 1/3 the price of the 70-200 IS version or 1/2 the non IS.
 
One from an AI Servo series with my 40D and Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS at 200mm and f/2.8, 1/1000, 800 ISO. Focus speed is adequate for BIF. I'm sure it would be fine for football.

2735302512_a6a4effb57_o.jpg
 
I've had a few of the 70-200's. For what it's worth my preference in order is

Canon F4
Sigma F2.8
Canon F2.8 IS

If you need F2.8 that obviously rules out the F4. The sigma is at least as sharp as the Canon, colours are more neutral, just as fast to focus and handles perfectly. It doesn't have weather proofing however which could be an issue for football. Having said that neither does the Canon F2.8 non-IS.
 
The only problem I've found with my Sigma 70-200 is what to do with the money I saved by not buying the Canon 70-200 :shrug:











Ps. I like my Sigmas (y)
 
and a couple shot with the canon 2xTC (& 40D)
between 300-400mm I love the combination (y)

Yawn1.jpg


Cap-head.jpg


PD.jpg
 
Thanks for the replies and pictures, very nice..
I seen other pics from Sandds 70-200 Non IS from the Lowflying, also superb quality with a 1.4x tc fitted..
I was thrown another problem tonight, a friend said "why not wait for the 50D to come out instead of the 40D".. :LOL::bang:

Looking at 2 options now:

40D & canon 70-200 f2.8 non IS
or
50D & Sigma 70-200

:bonk:
 
The 50D is dropping below £1,000 already in the UK and it is not yet released. I expect the price to fall further as the next few weeks go by, purely because in my opinion it is far to expensive compared to the 40D for the degree of improvement in features/performance....

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/prod721.html

The 40D has £60 cash back from Canon up until 21st September, so if you want to go that route you may want to make your purchase by then. Price at Amazon today is £588, minus the £60 cash back, so £528 in total.

I think a premium of over £400 is a bit rich for the incremental improvements offered by the 50D, so if it was my money I'd hang on for further price drops - I think £699, or £799 tops, seems a fair price compared to the current pricing of the 40D - or just pick up a bargaintastic 40D.

Remember as well that bodies tend to come and go, while lenses last far longer. Lens technology does not change that much from year to year so what you buy today should last you many years, if you choose wisely. Bodies, on the other hand, get superseded all the time as technology and features improve.
 
Remember as well that bodies tend to come and go, while lenses last far longer. Lens technology does not change that much from year to year so what you buy today should last you many years, if you choose wisely. Bodies, on the other hand, get superseded all the time as technology and features improve.
Click to expand...

Cheers tdodd.. sound advice
 
Remember of course f2.8 glass is not neccessarily about being able to take photos at f2.8, its also about using f2.8 to focus *every* shot.

Also the 40D and 50D have a high precision centre focus point if f2.8 or faster glass is up front.

These things are pretty important on a Canon...
 
I have just purchase the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 macro EX DG MACRO lens new for £465 off ebay (£799 rrp) for my Nikon D200. I would have preferred the Nikon lens version but I cannot justify the cost of around £1150 for the amount of photographic hobby work I do.

Not being expert I rely on photographic magazine reports, in the Digital Photographic magazine issue 106 for August 2008 on page 116 the gold award went to the Nikon f2.8, silver was the Sigma version and sorry every Cannon owner but the Canon version was an also ran.

Realspeed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top