Telephoto dilemma - worth the extra $ 500.00?

01/07/2009 10:20:11 AM · #1

Ok... I'm looking to pick up a telephoto lens today since I don't have one. I have a shoot this weekend and really want to use it.

Amazon has the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM for $ 1,488 and the 70-200 f/4L IS USM for $ 949.00.

Is/are the extra f stop(s) worth the $ 500.00? I'll be doing portrait work for now... eventually looking to start doing weddings once I learn more about photography. I'm sure the 950.00 lens will hold most of its value if resold..

Your thoughts? Kinda need answers soon!

Thanks!
Clay

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

01/07/2009 10:21:44 AM · #2

Yes. If you have any intention of shooting weddings, f/2.8 is a no-brainer.

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

01/07/2009 10:23:19 AM · #3

Weddings will be coming further down the road... that's why I was putting that in there though... could I get close to the price paid for the 950.00 lens if i upgrade further down the road when its wedding time?

LalliSig

01/07/2009 10:32:17 AM · #4

Yes, get the 2.8 vesion, no brainer

bobonacus

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/07/2009 10:33:10 AM · #5

Originally posted by malenurse1979:

L lenses do tend to keep their value fairly well, check out completed listings on ebay for a good idea .... though it canon brought out a new f/4 lens the old one would drop like a stone....

OdysseyF22

Panasonic DC-G9

Olympus 12-45mm f/4.0 Pro

01/07/2009 10:33:14 AM · #6

Originally posted by malenurse1979:

If you keep it in excellent condition, with the box and all the paperwork, I'd tend to think that you could get about $900 for it in a year or two. Maybe $800 as a low figure, if you were in a hurry to sell and couldn't wait for the perfect buyer.

Honestly, though, it's better to just wait and buy the lens you really want/need, instead of going through upgrade cycles - you end up spending more money upgrading than if you just bought the right lens in the first place. And for what it's worth, I've never been impressed by the 70-200 f/4. I know lots of others will jump all over me for saying that, but having used it myself, I just don't think it's that great to be worth almost $1k, given it's lack-luster f-stop.

For $850ish you can buy a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Mine is super sharp and a great performer; it does lack IS, but then again, photographers have been getting along without IS for a long time.

bobonacus

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/07/2009 10:36:38 AM · #7

Originally posted by OdysseyF22:

For $850ish you can buy a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Mine is super sharp and a great performer; it does lack IS, but then again, photographers have been getting along without IS for a long time.

personally, I know they are not the same lens but having had a 70-300 and now have a 75-300 IS the extra money for the IS is so worth it

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

01/07/2009 10:38:34 AM · #8

Originally posted by malenurse1979:

could I get close to the price paid for the 950.00 lens if i upgrade further down the road when its wedding time?

Probably, but that won't help you in the meantime if you need to shoot a moving subject in low light (a situation I've already faced repeatedly after making a similar choice). Also note that an inexpensive 1.4 tele extender would turn that f/2.8 into a stabilized 98-280mm f/4.

goinskiing

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/07/2009 10:45:28 AM · #9

Well, a few things to consider here:

1. What is your budget. If you have the extra $500 then yes, the 2.8 is definitely worth it, especially for indoors.
2. What is your current need? Are you doing primarily outdoor shoots? If you are, the F4 will serve you well and you can still get great bokeh at the aperature and it's plenty fast enough. If you are doing more indoor stuff, then definitely the 2.8 is worth it.

I have LOVED my 70-200 F4L. I primarily do outdoor portraits so it fits my needs perfectly. F4 just doesn't quite cut the mustard indoors and that F2.8 can make a huge difference.

I noticed that you have a couple of nice primes for indoors, the 85mm F1.8 is great for available light indoors, super fast, but if you sacrifice versatility, but if you need versatility it comes at a price.

Hope that helps.

Mike_Adams

Canon EOS-40D

01/07/2009 10:50:45 AM · #10

My two cents are this. The added flexibility that you have with the 2.8 cannot be understated. Yes for weddings it is a no brainer, but in the meantime if you want to do a dusk portrait session f4 might not get you there. Additionally, what 2.8 can do for you for in other shooting scenarios is just extremely helpful. I know lots of people who end up going back and getting the 2.8 later after having the f4, but as someone who owns the 2.8 I would NEVER consider giving up the 2.8 and going to the f4.

Five_Seat

01/07/2009 11:05:49 AM · #11

I had to make the same desicion a few months ago. I really wanted that extra stop, but I decided not to go with it for several reasons:

1. I value portability - the 2.8 version of the lens is much (physically) wider and a bit longer, it is much heavier.

2. I don't plan on doing any weddings any time soon, and the sports I shot are outdoors, so I don't really need the 2.8. If I am indoors I am usually shooting something still, so the IS handles it well.

3. If/When I get into portraits, I'll pick up a sharp, fast prime like 85 1.8 or the 50 1.4.

4. the f4 IS has the lastest generation IS - Canon says you gain four stops, I can get decent shots at 200mm with 1/15s on my 50D.

Something you might also want to consider as well is the non-IS version of the 2.8. It is basically the same price as the f4 IS. If you need the extra stop go for this. The extra stop will also come in very handy if you want to use either the 1.4 or 2x extenders.

1.4x = 98 - 280 F4
2x = 140 - 400 F5.6

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

01/07/2009 11:36:41 AM · #12

Why not eat your cake and have it to? As mentioned, L-lenses keep their value very well. Buy the f/4 for now. When you really want to get into weddings, sell it, counting the loss as "rent" and buy the f/2.8. This way you get to use a great lens the whole time and it will likely only cost you less than $200 extra to do it.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/07/2009 12:00:06 PM · #13

Yeah i can probably squeeze out the extra 500 so im guessing 2.8 it is! I really appreciate the help.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

01/07/2009 12:41:37 PM · #14

Originally posted by Mike_Adams:

For a dusk portrait scene, (or just about any portrait scene), you'd be better off with primes.

They're faster, brighter, sharper and less expensive.

Photologist

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

01/07/2009 01:01:56 PM · #15

I'm partial to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM lens...

(click to enlarge)

For indoor shooting without a flash, it's a great lens. The optics are quite impressive, as is the resale value.

Keep in mind that you don't have to make your decision on which lens to buy for the weekend...you can always rent the lens for your event ("try before you buy").

Message edited by author 2009-01-07 13:03:38.

01/07/2009 01:22:39 PM · #16

Well, after re-figuring my budget I could only get the f/4 for now :( It will give me a chance to get used to the lens and when I save up the extra 500-700 I'll get the 2.8.

Thanks again everyone for the help.

Oh and the last camera store closed january 3... in Shreveport, LA - not a small city. So if anyone wants to open a photography store you would have a monopoly lol.

Prof_Fate

01/07/2009 03:58:51 PM · #17

Weddings, 2.8.
Portraiture, again, 2.8 for reasons of bokeh. I've not shot the F4 IS, but the F4 /regular/ has bad bokeh IMO.
Bright sun? Probably the F4. The 2.8 IS tends to flare badly shooting into any light, the F4 regular does not.
If you making money with this lens then get the 2.8 IS. It will pay for itself over and over again.

goinskiing

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/07/2009 04:07:56 PM · #18

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

I LOVE the bokeh of the F4 regular, but I've never shot the 2.8 (someday...sigh). I get good bokeh at F7.1 if the distance and focal length are right.

01/08/2009 01:01:11 PM · #19

Well, i just thought i wouldnt be doing weddings for a while... Since i put up photos from my last shoot on myspace (also in my port here), one girl is wanting me to do their engagement and wedding.

Luckily, since i went with the f/,4 it's going to be an outdoor wedding and is starting around 4pm. Any other "must have" lenses i need between now and then? My only wide angle is the kit lens :(

Five_Seat

Olympus 12-45mm f/4.0 Pro

01/08/2009 01:04:15 PM · #20

It has been mentioned before, but you can always rent what you need for the weeding.

OdysseyF22

Panasonic DC-G9

01/08/2009 01:18:52 PM · #21

Originally posted by malenurse1979:

Getting something better than the kit lens is probably a good idea, as its optics aren't known for being great. The Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 is popular; I love my Canon 28-135mm IS (although it's f/5.6 at full zoom, which is slow).

If you're renting for the wedding, any of the Canon L-series standard zooms would work - about 24mm - 75+mm is the range you'll need, as you can't use the 70-200mm for the entire wedding (usually).

Ristyz

Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

01/08/2009 01:21:25 PM · #22

FWIW, the 2.8L focuses faster than the 4L and is far more accurate. I have and use both.

Olympus 12-45mm f/4.0 Pro

01/08/2009 01:24:00 PM · #23

Yeah about renting - a couple of posts back i mentioned the ONLY photography store in a city with a couple hundred thousand people closed down on january 3. :( nowhere to rent

OdysseyF22

Panasonic DC-G9

01/08/2009 01:25:09 PM · #24

Originally posted by malenurse1979:

Yeah about renting - a couple of posts back i mentioned the ONLY photography store in a city with a couple hundred thousand people closed down on january 3. :( nowhere to rent

I believe that some stores will ship you a rented lens and you ship it back when you're done.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5