Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

70-200 L advice

  • 22-04-2010 9:26am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭


    I have finally managed to get the money together to buy the canon 70-200L. I was wondering If the IS or Non Is is the better option. I do little or no indoor shooting. If I was going to go for the IS version will I need to hurry up considering the MK II is now out and this is way out of my budget.


Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Ballyman


    If you do little or no indoor shooting then the IS is a waste of money. However when you have to do some indoor stuff will you be sorry you don't have it?

    The non IS is incredibly sharp and lighter than the IS version. I have the non version and have no complaints. I'd like the IS version as I do the odd wedding but it hasn't really been a problem so far as i've used a monopod.

    The only person who can decide this is you as all versions will be recommended to you here. If cost is an issue then the non is is the winner as you should be able to pick one up second hand for about €750.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,281 ✭✭✭Ricky91t


    I have finally managed to get the money together to buy the canon 70-200L. I was wondering If the IS or Non Is is the better option. I do little or no indoor shooting. If I was going to go for the IS version will I need to hurry up considering the MK II is now out and this is way out of my budget.

    If anything wait a while ( I know, it's tough) But with the release of the new MKII people who are the type who can't live unless they have the newest equipment will soon be selling used but mint condition glass, Also consider the used Market or even buy from a used lens from a UK shop..

    I can say that mifsuds.co.uk(bought a camera from these) offer a great service and
    By this evening I'll also be able to comment on mpbphotographic.co.uk(lens from these)


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 4,948 ✭✭✭pullandbang


    I have finally managed to get the money together to buy the canon 70-200L. I was wondering If the IS or Non Is is the better option. I do little or no indoor shooting. If I was going to go for the IS version will I need to hurry up considering the MK II is now out and this is way out of my budget.

    f2.8 or f4 ?

    I have the non IS f4 and it is incredibly sharp with good saturation and contrast. It's rated as one of Canon's best lenses - incredibly light, relatively small and fast focus. €400'ish second hand.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    Depends on your subjects, even if you shoot portraits IS will help lower iso on a static portrait. For weddings I always use it and can shoot as low as 1/30th at 200mm. Only applies if you have a 1 series body but the IS version is weather sealed too


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭bernard0368


    I could wait, a little and see if any come up on the second hand market. I am however a little wary in buying s/h gear. pullandbang I am inclined to go for the f2.8 just for the extra speed not sure why though as I have a 28-70 f2.8 and I can honestly say I have never used it at f2.8. I suppose its a bit of "looking at it rather than looking for it"


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Ballyman


    Well if you are wary buying second hand gear then you have no option but the IS as the non-IS is no longer manufactured as far as I know.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    I could wait, a little and see if any come up on the second hand market. I am however a little wary in buying s/h gear. pullandbang I am inclined to go for the f2.8 just for the extra speed not sure why though as I have a 28-70 f2.8 and I can honestly say I have never used it at f2.8. I suppose its a bit of "looking at it rather than looking for it"


    The reason I buy an f2.8 lens is two fold

    1: to use it at f2.8
    2: better image quality if you stop it down a bit, at f3.5 its stopped down but still under an f4 lens wide open


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,258 ✭✭✭swingking


    f2.8 or f4 ?

    I have the non IS f4 and it is incredibly sharp with good saturation and contrast. It's rated as one of Canon's best lenses - incredibly light, relatively small and fast focus. €400'ish second hand.

    Glad to see my old lens was given a good home :D


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 4,948 ✭✭✭pullandbang


    swingking wrote: »
    Glad to see my old lens was given a good home :D

    ....and it's getting plenty of use :)

    It is a cracker of a lens though and light enough to carry as a walkabout.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,699 ✭✭✭ThOnda


    Cannot wait to get mine from my boss as a quite delayed Christmas present! And because he waited, there is only MkII in shops now :D


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,718 ✭✭✭.Longshanks.


    ^ lucky sod:D


Advertisement