Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,704   Posts: 1,482,701   Online: 903
      
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Lens Question

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    10
    I'm thinking about purchasing a 70-200mm 2.8 Canon lens and wanted to know if anyone had any expeirence with image stabalizer lenses?

    The image stablizer 70-200mm is about $500.00 more than just the regular lens. Is it worth it to spend the extra money?

    Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.

    JP

  2. #2
    Loose Gravel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    921
    Images
    14
    I understand the image stabalizer buys you about 1 stop of shutter speed. If you need that stop, then the $500 is worth it.
    Watch for Loose Gravel

  3. #3
    bmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,156
    Images
    9
    Just realize that this lens weighs more than my entire Nikon kit. It is a beast.
    hi!

  4. #4
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,079
    Images
    20
    I haven't used one myself, but from results I've seen by others, it's pretty impressive.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    958
    JP,
    My wife owns the original Canon 80-200 f 2.8. Brian is right, its a monster, but it's also pretty sharp.
    My personal preference would be to buy an 85 f1.8 for the signifcantly closer (portraiture) focusing and lens speed and a smaller 200 f2.8.
    My predjudice aside, many of the guys at my local camera store are into Canon and are bemoaning the fact that their 80-200s don't have IS. They claim you get a real 2-3 stop improvement on the low end shutter speed.
    I think if you're inclined to do hand held shooting, the IS version is the way to go. You'll forget the price differential shortly after the purchase and be very happy with the improved functionally of the lens as the years roll on. IS seems to be a really significant step in lens evolution.
    take care,
    Tom

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    10
    Tom

    Thanks for the advice... I was looking for a good all around zoom at the legnth. I like your suggestion of two lenses but would prefer to have just the one 70-200mm.

    So how does your wife like th orinal lens?

    JP

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    958
    JP,
    She LOVES it. And usually uses it at the longer end of the zoom range, so the close focusing limitation (which I think has been addressed in the newer versions) is not an issue for her. the lens allows her to obtain pictures a cut above her friends with normal 28-105 zooms and the speed of the lens lets her cover any situation with 400 speed film. When we go on vacation, I usually bring my fuji 690 rangefinder and joke that my 6x9 is lighter than her 35mm. She is generally considered by other tourists as the "serious" photographer and my camera isn't given a second look.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    10
    Tom

    Glad to hear your wife love the lens... I've been readng up on IS lens and thinking that might be the way to go.

    JP



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin