VR or f2.8 ?


Status
Not open for further replies.

kevyan

New Member
Jan 5, 2005
550
0
0
42
PR
#1
Hi all,

Need advices.

For shooting church events, when surrounding is dark, and the only bright area is the stage, which will be best? Oh, hope to use the lens outdoor too.

1) 70 - 300mm VR
2) 80 - 200mm f2.8
3) Any other recommendation.

Thanks in advance.
 

staz

New Member
May 4, 2004
296
0
0
#2
i would definitely pick 2.8. u get different dof when u use 2.8 too. vr has a limit and quality n build of the lens is different too.
 

kelccm

Senior Member
Mar 2, 2004
1,515
2
38
A village in a forest
#3
Best of both world would be to get a lens with both VR and f/2.8. If not, I would go for f/2.8 + a monopod.
 

emerald

New Member
Dec 17, 2007
253
0
0
Bukit Gombak
www.xbklhub.com
#5
choose f/2.8, got the 2.8 VR version if u got a big wallet.

The f/2.8 not only faster, but the built quality and image quality will both be better than 70-300.
 

geraldkhoo

Senior Member
Jun 15, 2007
2,571
0
36
The Tiny Red Dot
sgstrobist.blogspot.com
#7
Having VR is liken to having a tripod or monopod built into the lens. However with a f/2.8 aperture, you can have more light, which means faster shutter speeds. There are shots that you can take with a f/2.8 lens that you cannot with a "normal" aperture lens. Also, if the subject you are taking is constantly moving, a VR lens does not help much because it only compensates for your handshake and not the subject's movement. To freeze the subject's movement, you need a faster shutter speed... which means either a bigger aperture or higher ISO.

For me, if given a choice of VR or 2.8 (and not both), I'll take 2.8 anyday. I can always carry a monopod with me ;)

Anyway... I was shooting for the Planetshakers + Tim Hughes night of worship... and shooting on stage is fine with a f/2.8, but when going down to the crowd, I had to use my 50mm f/1.4. The other 3 photographers were using the Canon system, and they had the 85mm f/1.2. I tried my 85mm f/1.8 and found that it was still not fast enough. So... to your question... how dark is dark? You can check out some of the shots on my flickr page.
 

luna_sea83

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2005
1,294
0
36
East
#8
Get the best of both world if u got the budget,

70-200mm f/2.8 VR as wat the guys said it earlier.
 

kevyan

New Member
Jan 5, 2005
550
0
0
42
PR
#9
Cool! I couldn't make it for the worship...

Were you the official photographer? How come you can be on stage?

You photos looks good man...

Read your profile.... you are such a blessed man to have a wife who understand and support your hobby.

My wife bought me a D50 to start me out too...

Having VR is liken to having a tripod or monopod built into the lens. However with a f/2.8 aperture, you can have more light, which means faster shutter speeds. There are shots that you can take with a f/2.8 lens that you cannot with a "normal" aperture lens. Also, if the subject you are taking is constantly moving, a VR lens does not help much because it only compensates for your handshake and not the subject's movement. To freeze the subject's movement, you need a faster shutter speed... which means either a bigger aperture or higher ISO.

For me, if given a choice of VR or 2.8 (and not both), I'll take 2.8 anyday. I can always carry a monopod with me ;)

Anyway... I was shooting for the Planetshakers + Tim Hughes night of worship... and shooting on stage is fine with a f/2.8, but when going down to the crowd, I had to use my 50mm f/1.4. The other 3 photographers were using the Canon system, and they had the 85mm f/1.2. I tried my 85mm f/1.8 and found that it was still not fast enough. So... to your question... how dark is dark? You can check out some of the shots on my flickr page.
 

#10
Hi all,

Need advices.

For shooting church events, when surrounding is dark, and the only bright area is the stage, which will be best? Oh, hope to use the lens outdoor too.

1) 70 - 300mm VR
2) 80 - 200mm f2.8
3) Any other recommendation.

Thanks in advance.
Definitely get a f2.8 for the DOF.
 

CT 3833

New Member
Sep 23, 2006
914
0
0
#11
Having VR is liken to having a tripod or monopod built into the lens. However with a f/2.8 aperture, you can have more light, which means faster shutter speeds. There are shots that you can take with a f/2.8 lens that you cannot with a "normal" aperture lens. Also, if the subject you are taking is constantly moving, a VR lens does not help much because it only compensates for your handshake and not the subject's movement. To freeze the subject's movement, you need a faster shutter speed... which means either a bigger aperture or higher ISO.

For me, if given a choice of VR or 2.8 (and not both), I'll take 2.8 anyday. I can always carry a monopod with me ;)

Anyway... I was shooting for the Planetshakers + Tim Hughes night of worship... and shooting on stage is fine with a f/2.8, but when going down to the crowd, I had to use my 50mm f/1.4. The other 3 photographers were using the Canon system, and they had the 85mm f/1.2. I tried my 85mm f/1.8 and found that it was still not fast enough. So... to your question... how dark is dark? You can check out some of the shots on my flickr page.
Sorry for the OT, nice pictures...! wow many of the shots at ISO3200 still look rock solidly clean. Well done!
 

kevyan

New Member
Jan 5, 2005
550
0
0
42
PR
#12
Okay...

Got to start saving up for the lens liao.

Anyone selling your 80-200 f2.8? ;p Cheap cheap sell to me... ;)
 

#13
Cool! I couldn't make it for the worship...

Were you the official photographer? How come you can be on stage?

You photos looks good man...

Read your profile.... you are such a blessed man to have a wife who understand and support your hobby.

My wife bought me a D50 to start me out too...
Yep... I was one of the official photographers :D It was a really fun shoot to do... and it was the first time I put the D300 to the test with such high ISO... and it did not disappoint ;) Yes... my wife has been very supportive of my hobby... :bsmilie: I love my wife! :heart:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom