70-200mm F2.8

[edwinlimlx]

Should i go for the Canon, Sigma or Tamron?
Which is better? More worth it? Price?

[m3lv1nh0]

If you want the best and the best only, just get the 70-200 2.8 IS.

[wdEvA]

you wont get the optics, build, and USM speed that the canon offers over the sigma and tamron.
but of cause it depends on your budget.

[edwinlimlx]

IS is way off budget. So the canon 70-200 is much better off the price to equipment?

[rainwhisper]

You will never go wrong with Canon 70-200.

[fongi]

i oso having problem choosing between this particular lens, 70-200mm. but mine is between the f2.8 and f4.

[rainwhisper]

Originally Posted by fongi i oso having problem choosing between this particular lens, 70-200mm. but mine is between the f2.8 and f4.

Depends on what you want to use it for? Indoor or Outdoors? I picked F4 because it is cheaper and light. And i used it for outdoors daytime only.

[billpepsi]

Originally Posted by edwinlimlx Should i go for the Canon, Sigma or Tamron? Which is better? More worth it? Price?

Every upgrade will cost you money, so if you can afford it, go for Canon, so that we won't need to look back one day and regret later that you should have gotten Canon in the first place.

Also to consider, that if you plan to get external flash, Canon EX flash works better with Canon lenses.

[fongi]

Originally Posted by rainwhisper Depends on what you want to use it for? Indoor or Outdoors? I picked F4 because it is cheaper and light. And i used it for outdoors daytime only.

really headache on this part, cos i shoot my kids quite often, so i tot of f2.8, den the tot of the weight, not sure if i can handle it for whole day if i go oversea (cos i fly very often)... is the weight really dat bothersome? i have not carry any heavy lens b4, so i dunnoe the feelin.
and for kids (mine is quite active) f2.8 is a must rite? or is f4 enof liao? as for low light issue... dun think i'll shoot in the night, except if i shoot them during performance

[edwinlimlx]

the f2.8 and f4 put me in a dilemma too. However considering that I love DOF, 2.8 should be the way to go for me. However the cost... Ahh! =\

[scarecrow]

Had the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS for some time. Great optics! Excellent build! but so HEAVY! Had to give it up.

If its the only lens to get what you desire...then no choice. Tamron and sigma may be lighter (not by much) and the quality is not as good.

I think you should try get a loan for a day before purchasing. Or buy a second hand and try it for a month or two. The second hand price for Canon maintain much better than sigma and tamron. I actually broke even after a few months.

[charlesleong]

rent both and try. then decide... what works for others may not work for you.

[aungzawwin]

hi,
check out the comparison here. much cheaper Sigma or Tamron lacks "something" compared to Canon lens. cheers.
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/..._n15/page2.asp

[peekarwe]

You really have to hold a F2.8 to figure out why you might not shoot as much with it. And also, at F2.8, the Canon's 70-200 ain't as sharp as you might want it.... and you end up shooting at 3.5/4 anyway.

[eddy400d]

i have the canon 70-200 f2.8. but i recall reading a review on the canon 70-200 family and the best of the lot was the f4 IS model in term of sharpness and weight. hope u can find the article i read. gd luck

[m3lv1nh0]

Originally Posted by peekarwe You really have to hold a F2.8 to figure out why you might not shoot as much with it. And also, at F2.8, the Canon's 70-200 ain't as sharp as you might want it.... and you end up shooting at 3.5/4 anyway.

Do also understand that a 2.8 can stop down to 4 but a 4 cannot go up to a 2.8. 2.8 + IS helps alot on low light condition. If you are doing events which you cannot risk losing that moment, you will need that 2.8 IS.

[peekarwe]

Originally Posted by m3lv1nh0 Do also understand that a 2.8 can stop down to 4 but a 4 cannot go up to a 2.8. 2.8 + IS helps alot on low light condition. If you are doing events which you cannot risk losing that moment, you will need that 2.8 IS.

Of course. So the fella who can risk losing that moment will buy the 2.8is lor. I can afford to lose that moment so for the rest of the time, I dun have to carry the weight around. And 70-200 is mostly outdoor shooting, where 2.8 may not be necessary, unless of course, I shoot night weddings and band concerts, which I dun. So for me, F4 works. I use it more than the 135 F2 since most of my shoots outdoor at F2 will require ND filters already.

In fact, to not risk losing the moment, the 200L F2 is even better.

[SnapJaX]

simple solution, just rent or lend the lenses out for a field test, and TS can experience for himself the usage and quality and etc etc.

instead of sitting around and reading theory, get out and do some practicals! =D

[scarecrow]

That's right! Should have enough info and advice to end thread, right?

Anyways, good luck.

[peekarwe]

Originally Posted by m3lv1nh0 Do also understand that a 2.8 can stop down to 4 but a 4 cannot go up to a 2.8. 2.8 + IS helps alot on low light condition. If you are doing events which you cannot risk losing that moment, you will need that 2.8 IS.

I saw some of your shots from your blog and portfolio. Swee! I think your F2.8 is put to good use!