- Messages
- 3,795
- Name
- Lee
- Edit My Images
- No
I am having second thoughts about the sigma 120-300mm f/2.8. the reason being is that i do more photography sub 200mm and its really only holidays where i go over that. Even in Kenya i only had 300mm and did quite well.
I am really tempted by the canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS. It will get used more, the start at 70mm means i have full focal range of 17-200mm with no gaps and that can be extended to 280mm with a 1.4x TC. It wieghs a whole Kilo less, its smaller, another bonus is that it has IS.
Yes sure the 300mm @2.8 is something i would love to have but i also need fast lenses for low light work so that rules out the 100-300 f/4 from Sigma & the Canon 100-400 f4-5.6. I think the 300mm @2.8 and the posiblilty that i could get a relatively cheap 600 f/5.6 with a 2x TC made it a ver attractive option for just £500 more.
What do you rekon is it me getting inpatient and not wanting to wait for another month or so to get the sigma lens or do you think the 70-200L IS 2.8 should have been my first thought.
Lee.
I am really tempted by the canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS. It will get used more, the start at 70mm means i have full focal range of 17-200mm with no gaps and that can be extended to 280mm with a 1.4x TC. It wieghs a whole Kilo less, its smaller, another bonus is that it has IS.
Yes sure the 300mm @2.8 is something i would love to have but i also need fast lenses for low light work so that rules out the 100-300 f/4 from Sigma & the Canon 100-400 f4-5.6. I think the 300mm @2.8 and the posiblilty that i could get a relatively cheap 600 f/5.6 with a 2x TC made it a ver attractive option for just £500 more.
What do you rekon is it me getting inpatient and not wanting to wait for another month or so to get the sigma lens or do you think the 70-200L IS 2.8 should have been my first thought.
Lee.