So I've settled on my next lens purchase, the Canon 2.8 70-200mm. My question however is should I get it with the image stabilizer or not? There is a HUGE price difference between the two. I'm thinking if I got it without I prob would need a mono pod for spotting to keep it steady. Your thoughts?
I would get the IS, this is one of the few highest rated Len's and is the most desirable lens to own for a canon. Get the 2X multiplier and leave your 100-400IS home from now on. If I could have any lens, this with the mulitlplyer is it! I WISH oh I wish someday!
The three most common expressions in aviation are, "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" and "Oh Crap".
For sure get the IS, what a beast, I got to try one, pin sharp!
PS, the monopod thing is just going to FREAK out more jack-asses and cops!
Mike
"my finger on the shutter button, while my eye is over my shoulder"
Does anyone have any similar advice with respect to Nikon's 80-200 f/2.8 non-VR and the 70-200 f/2.8 VR?
I have the Nikkor 80-200 2.8 non VR and I love it. I can't compare it to the VR model but it is my favorite. The AF is fast and it is so sharp. I wish my 400VR behaved the same way.
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
Nick, do you have the 80-200 AF-S or the 80-200 AF-D? I think that the 80-200 AF-D is the prior iteration of the 80-200 AF-S, and consequently is much less expensive. Not that its cheap, because, if I am not mistaken, the AF-D still runs about $800-$1,000, while the AF-S is in the ballpark of $1,500 just like the new 70-200VR.
Anyway, next time we're out spotting perhaps you'd let me try the lens out? I'm currently trying to figure out which of the three f/2.8 lenses (i.e., the 80-200 AF-D, the 80-200 AF-S or the 70-200VR) I want to get as my next lens purchase. I hear great things about all of these lenses.
I have the D. Yep, I paid 800 for it. You can use it anytime you want. Let me know when you are heading out again. I don't know much about the S but I don't know if the VR makes much difference. My lens focuses so fast if I hold it steady it gets great results.
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
Ok you Nikon people shouldn't be posting in a Canon thread.....! j/k :lol:
Thanks for the advice guys, I was talking to Fred yesterday who gave me some great advice on the lens and how to use it with the multiplier.
I hope part of that advice didn't include dropping it in a lake! I know Fred likes to get the most out of his lenses but underwater photography is a bit much.
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
G'day Tommy
The IS on the 70-200 is "fantastic" so say the least.
Its quite a bit better than the IS on my 100-400 and allows for some real fun in low light withmotion blurr shots.
If you can afford it its well worth the expense.
Darren
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks