The Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Telephoto lens? I'm wondering if I should splurge. I'm looking mostly to capture kids sports and I have a hard time with getting light on my f/4-5.6 lens. This is the one L series lens that might be in my price range (otherwise I would get the 70-200mm instead of just the 200mm). Anyway, if you had it, or could suggest other I would love some input.
Here's a review: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...7&cat=2&page=1
I've considered getting that lens for for long time... I can't afford the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and my 70-200 f/4L IS is too slow for indoor use.
Well if you think it looks good Jimbo I must be headed in the right direction, because you take great shots. I've really struggled with Fall overcast football days, and I never get good indoor tae kwon do shots. I kindof wrote off all the L series lenses as being out of my price range these days, but this one is definately cheaper and might be worth the pinch.
Ahhhhhhhh...I shouldn't have looked, now I want them both. That lens would probably be better for the Tae Kwon Do shots, but harder to capture the distance in the football shots. Maybe I can do one lens this year, and another lens next year. My husband's comment is that he guesses I'm going to need a bigger camera bag.
I'm going to toss my 2 cents in, and say the 200mm prime is all wrong for you.
My recommendation would be to get a used 70-200, as opposed to a new 200 prime. Prime lenses are very useful, however primarily when you're "setting up" a shot. The constant action of sports photography or just kids in general would likely leave you very frustrated with a prime.
I have purchased (and sold) several "high end" lenses on eBay used, and have yet to be disappointed. Typically, cameras and lenses are something that people take very good care of - especially one that was as expensive as an L lens when the original owner first bought it.
Prime lenses are a great thing to have, however they're rarely something you would use for "general shooting".
Another very excellent option is the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG, which is a great lens (I owned one when I had my Nikon), and is quite comparable in size, weight and quality to the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM. It's a beefy, fast lens that works very well both indoors and outdoors.
Important to remember with ANY "2.8" 70-200mm lens - there is a tripod ring for a reason. They're heavy. You don't have to use a tripod or a monopod, but if you do - NEVER mount the "camera" on the tripod when using a heavy lens. Always mount the lens. You'd be surprised how easily that heavy lens will snap right off, forever taking the camera's mounting ring with it. Always mount the tripod to the heaviest component. (Aside from the mechanical dangers, you want the tripod in the center of gravity, for a steady shot...) I use a monopod with my big lenses, mainly because I'm a candy-ass and can't hold that thing up for too long.
My recommendation based on what you're saying you want to do with it:
New (or even used!) Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG or Used Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM.
Thanks for your input John W. Again, for a dog forum, this has been a real great place for photography advice. I've actually never shopped ebay, I'll have to spend some time on it.
Also, thanks again for the advice about tripod ring. I still am kindof a newbie back in the photography hobby.
The worst I've ever personally had was a blurry shot from mounting a heavy rig by the camera body. A person I used to work with however snapped the mounting ring off a Canon 1Ds and smashed an EF 200mm F/2L IS.Originally Posted by Maggiesmomm
*sob*Originally Posted by John W
"Find out who you are and do it on purpose."