Photography canon pro/amatures... Which lens would you go for?

jo_sal77

No Comment!
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Zone 6, N.London
Which one would you go for ideally?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L IS
or
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM L IS
 
The 2.8 IS if the funds allow but at £1,200 it's a lot of money and you will obviously need to try before you buy.

To throw a spanner in the works have you considered the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS?
 
steve1975l said:
The 2.8 IS if the funds allow but at £1,200 it's a lot of money and you will obviously need to try before you buy.

To throw a spanner in the works have you considered the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS?

Hi, is there a major difference without the "IS"? I'm worried that my shots will just come out jerky with out a tripod, especially long range.

Thanks, Jo
 
ChriS3 said:
f/2.8 for me, but it is expensive. I'd rent one for a day or two to make sure it was worth it. Do you have a Calumet nearby?

Cool! That's an idea... cheers, didn't know services like that existed.

Is that http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk ? There seems to be 2 in London. Must check it out this weekend.
 
I'm a pro photographer, I am a member of the NUJ, and my recent work includes such variety as the New York Times, and Big Brother....

SERIOUSLY consider the Sigma 70-200 F2.8

Its 95% as good as the non IS Canon L and a huge amount less money.

I have kit that would be scoffed at by some amatuers I expect, as I run all sigma lenses, however the fact remains, I get paid for my stuff, so the kit can't be all bad, it IS about your skill, not about whos got the biggest whitest lens.