Spendin' da Moneyz!

[TitusvileSurfer]

Haha oops this is T5's thread isn't it?
Well it is pretty relative to his origional post asking for general advice on the 70-200 f/2.8 and 5DmkII right? Sorry though!

 

[TriggerHappyDude]

Great advice, thanks so much again! Hopefully T5 might have got something good from it all too.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

I was happy to help, going to bed now.
Gonna go find some redfish in a couple of hours!

 

[IPT]

FWIW - I have the 24-105 IS and love it. It's my carry around lens on a full sensor rig (and I have the 70-200 in all it's versions, 300mm 2.8, and f4, 24mm 1.4, and on and on...). I usually shoot landscapes though (and wildlife with the longer lenses). To me the IS is worth it and I like the little bit of extra zoom since if I can I only take the one lens on hikes and such.

I also have the 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 versions. You can get the 1.8 version (USA) for like $70 (it's plastic but image quality is awesome, do any search on it - sharp as a tack). 50mm is a great portrait lens and it'll give you the speed for your baby indoors or shallow DOF. I got the F1.4 version for the Northern lights (lots of motion) and because it's part of the sickness. Someone once did the math and the step up in light gain from F1.4 to F1.8 was only like 2/3 of a stop. Not a big gain compared to the price difference.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

You have all four 70-200's?! what?! I can see the 70-200 f/2.8 IS because of its versatility, then the maybe also the f/4 non IS in addition for its weight...but the other two as well? Sheish! Hats off to you!

 

[IPT]

3 of them actually (lol). Perfect example of why you should just buy the best the first time. I wanted the 70-200 but didn't want to spring for the IS (probably couldn't afford it either at the time). Then later I decided it really was a mistake. I wanted (n e e d e d) the IS. The F2.8 was to expensive, and too much weight. I was perfectly happy with the F4 IS version. Then thousands of $ were spent (a gift thankfully) to go to Churchill to shoot the Polar bears. There was no way I was gonna risk wanting that extra stop of speed there (or focusing ability since I had recently upgraded my body too).

Thus, I am now the proud owner of three versions of the 70-200mm (sigh). Anyone want the 70-200mm F4 non IS I am ready to part ways with it. I like having the option of the F2.8 or the F4 depending on what I am shooting and how far I have to lug my gear.

What is the fourth version?

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

I shoot wide open at f/2.8 probably half the time...I couldn't stand being without it!

70-200 f/4 (no IS)
70-200 f/4 IS
70-200 f/2.8 (no IS)
70-200 f/2/8 IS

 

[IPT]

ah yes.... nope, though I do have (on permanent loan) the non IS 300mm F2.8 . What a beast that thing is!

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

I WANT IT!!
I did get to shoot with a 400mm f/2.8 IS last week...man. I was using a ball head to!