Supply issues, typically

Ste Manns

Ste Manns

Messages
1,348
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

After a very long time dreaming about getting my mits on some decent gear, I recently got the opportunity, however, typically now I have the money I can't find anywhere with stock!

Anyhow, I've managed to get hold of a Canon 1Dmk4, and a 24-70 f2.8L, after a struggle. I could have done the mail order thing but I guess I'm old fashioned and don't much like that way. I now am on the lookout for a 70-200 f2.8 (non IS) but nobody has one. I'm now starting to think about getting an f4 IS version instead (for around the same sort of money) and my question is, is this a wise choice or should I hold out for the f2.8? In the real world will I miss the extra speed or will the IS on the f4 compensate me? (I don't mean DOF, I know I'm losing there but I'm thinking I'll still get a lower light shot with the IS via slower shutterspeed?)

It's a bit critical really hence me asking your opinions, as I probably won't get another chance to spend serious money for quite some time.

I should say I'm mainly a portrait man, I will be involved with weddings eventually, and I also enjoy a spot of street and some wildlife for fun.

Or, am I a silly man who ought to be more patient?:nuts:
 
Depends on what you want to do with it. The IS versions are weatherproof, the Non-IS versions are not.

Both are very good optically.

Steve
 
Don't you just hate it when you don't know what's for the best? :thinking:

Weather sealing is a nice to have for sure, but not essential as I tend to take care of my kit in a "that fluffy white cloud over there looks menacing" kind of way. There again I like to use DOF creatively and the f2.8 appeals. IS is nice to have but again, not essential, so I guess you've helped me decide and I shall wait it out. I'd like the f2.8 IS II but its double the price and that's a whole extra lens worth of dosh!
 
Take a look through your shots that you like best that were taken in the 70-200 focal range, and see what aperture you used. (Lightroom makes this really easy - I assume it's easy-ish in Aperture and Bridge too)

If you don't use regularly apertures below f/4 then you can go for the f/4 IS which has lots of advantages (size, weight, price, IS, arguably sharpness). If you need apertures below f/4 for the depth of field then you need one of the 2.8 versions (Kerso was doing the 2.8 IS Ml I for £900 I read on another thread).

The 1D Mk IV has such good high-ISO capabilities that it's getting less important to have the wider aperture simply for lower light work. (IMO)
 
I'm going to buy f4 IS end of the month so good timing for me. New stock that time innit?

What's the best and most reliable place to buy from ? Uk based.
 
markrichardson said:
Take a look through your shots that you like best that were taken in the 70-200 focal range, and see what aperture you used. (Lightroom makes this really easy - I assume it's easy-ish in Aperture and Bridge too)

If you don't use regularly apertures below f/4 then you can go for the f/4 IS which has lots of advantages (size, weight, price, IS, arguably sharpness). If you need apertures below f/4 for the depth of field then you need one of the 2.8 versions (Kerso was doing the 2.8 IS Ml I for £900 I read on another thread).

The 1D Mk IV has such good high-ISO capabilities that it's getting less important to have the wider aperture simply for lower light work. (IMO)
Click to expand...

Well that's made it even harder for me to decide :D

I've sent Kerso a PM and await his response. Failing that I've decided to wait it out for a bit and see what turns up.

In the past I had this focal range covered with an old but trusty Tamron Adaptall 70-210 f3.8/4, which I mainly used wide open, and thinking about it I often felt I needed more so I guess there is the answer. That said, it was on the 50D which was useless past ISO 400 most often than not.

Thanks everyone :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top