Which 70-200?

siomn

siomn

Messages
195
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been doing some photography at my daughters swimming club with my 70-200 f4 non IS but i find that at most pools the Speed with the F4 is not enough and if i wind the ISO up to far then the pics get too noisy. Looking to upgrade to the F2.8 IS version.
What are the main differences between the old and new models , apart from £1000.
What lens do/would you use for poolside photography?
Is the 28-300 f3.5 - 5.6 a viable alternative?
How does the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO EX DG Macro HSM II Compare
Any advice appreciated

Cheers
 
siomn said:
I have been doing some photography at my daughters swimming club with my 70-200 f4 non IS but i find that at most pools the Speed with the F4 is not enough and if i wind the ISO up to far then the pics get too noisy. Looking to upgrade to the F2.8 IS version.
What are the main differences between the old and new models , apart from £1000.
What lens do/would you use for poolside photography?
Is the 28-300 f3.5 - 5.6 a viable alternative?
How does the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO EX DG Macro HSM II Compare
Any advice appreciated

Cheers
Click to expand...

Good review of the f/2.8 MkII here, and comparisons http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx Basically it sets a new standard optically and has high enough resolution to take a 2x teleconverter. That's a first.

I can't see how the 28-300 would help with the light issue. Or anything else for that mater - it's only virtue is focal length range.
 
Thanks for the Link, an interesting comparison, agree with what you say about the 28-300 thought was that the lower end focal length may be beneficial but guess i'll be saving now for the MkII
 
Why would the 28-300 be any better than any of the 70-200s? OK, so it does f/3.5, but only at 28 to 30-something mm. And you'd lose image quality. If you need action stopping power I'd go for the 70-200 f/2.8 classic.
 
I've never shot poolside, but have you looked to see what focal length you used most of the time? Going from f4 to f2.8 is only going to give you one stop - I don't know whether that will let you keep the iso down low enough. But if you tend to shoot in the 85mm-100mm range you could consider the 85/1.8 or even 1.2 (slow focusing though) to give you several extra stops. If you are always up near 200mm though 2.8 is the best you can do without breaking the bank completely.
 
ianmarsh said:
I've never shot poolside, but have you looked to see what focal length you used most of the time? Going from f4 to f2.8 is only going to give you one stop - I don't know whether that will let you keep the iso down low enough. But if you tend to shoot in the 85mm-100mm range you could consider the 85/1.8 or even 1.2 (slow focusing though) to give you several extra stops. If you are always up near 200mm though 2.8 is the best you can do without breaking the bank completely.
Click to expand...

Good suggestion :thumbs:
 
Nifkin said:
Why would the 28-300 be any better than any of the 70-200s? OK, so it does f/3.5, but only at 28 to 30-something mm. And you'd lose image quality. If you need action stopping power I'd go for the 70-200 f/2.8 classic.
Click to expand...

Only reason i threw this lens into the mix was for the extra focal length

ianmarsh said:
I've never shot poolside, but have you looked to see what focal length you used most of the time? Going from f4 to f2.8 is only going to give you one stop - I don't know whether that will let you keep the iso down low enough. But if you tend to shoot in the 85mm-100mm range you could consider the 85/1.8 or even 1.2 (slow focusing though) to give you several extra stops. If you are always up near 200mm though 2.8 is the best you can do without breaking the bank completely.
Click to expand...

Not had a chance to shoot poolside yet, Have shot at a couple of open meets with a 70-200 f4 with average success, the problem lies in the fact that she swims in 25m and 50 m pools with either 6 or 8 lanes, the light levels vary considerably from pool to pool and if i can't get poolside shooting has to take place from the spectators area so fixed focal length is not really an option. Will be taking her training later this week so will take the f4 along with my 150 f2.8 macro and see what the difference is.

Cheers
 
My 1st choice would be a 70-200 f/2.8... If you can afford the IS one, go for that, if not the non-IS will still be excellent as your shutter speeds should be high enough to not have to worry about shaky hands. If it's not high enough, the swimmers are going to be blurred anyway, so you don't gain all that much.

If you don't need the extra length, the 85mm f/1.8 would be my next choice, it's (relatively) cheap, very sharp, and fast. I'd have thought the 85mm f/1.2 is a lens so unsuitable for sport it's not funny :D. Slow focussing and razor thin depth of field mean you'd have no chance of capturing the action, surely?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top