Advice on first lens.

Wang · 17 Jan 2008 at 21:04

Well, at weekend i decided to buy myself a 400D & 17-55 kit lens. Really enjoying snapping away (poor, poor shot at the moment though

) and have already found myself wanting a new lens. Now i'm hoping to get to a few motor racing events, horseracing meets etc so was thinking along the lines of the Canon 70-200 F4L. Now my question is, will this have enough reach for such events and also how much of an improvement am i looking at with the F2.8 version (non IS)? Am i likely to find myself wanting the extra couple of stops for lower light conditions straight away or is the F4 going to cope fine?

Also, if anyone has any other recommendations for a similar lens or better suited lens i would appreciate the advice.

p.s The 70-200 F4L i have found for £330 and the 2.8L for £629. Is it really that much better?

wez130 · 17 Jan 2008 at 21:11

i'd recommend the 70-200 F/4L, great lens, nice and sharp, the only difference between the F/4 and the F/2.8 is 1 stop, it will allow you to take shots in less light than with the F/4, apart from that, it is exactly the same, same optics and build quality so make your mind up from that. I think it should be long enough for motor racing too

Wang · 17 Jan 2008 at 21:18

wez130 said:
i'd recommend the 70-200 F/4L, great lens, nice and sharp, the only difference between the F/4 and the F/2.8 is 1 stop, it will allow you to take shots in less light than with the F/4, apart from that, it is exactly the same, same optics and build quality so make your mind up from that. I think it should be long enough for motor racing too

Cheers for the reply Wez. Regarding the extra stop being an advantage for low light, am i correct in thinking that upping the iso from 100 to 200, would compensate for the extra stop (albeit it a slightly noisier shot)?

(Sorry for what may seem like dumbass questions but i really am very new to this)

rpstewart · 17 Jan 2008 at 21:21

I'd suggest passing on the F/2.8 unless you want to go the whole hog and get the IS one, the IS one has a slightly better optical design but is a fair bit more expensive. The one to look for is the F/4 IS, it's brand new and is starting to build a reputation as having image quality on a par with the f/2.8 IS which itself is reckoned to be the best quality zoom lens money can buy.

Geffen · 18 Jan 2008 at 01:34

If your shooting in day light then the F4 will do fine and the only reason to look at the F2.8 would be for the wider aperture to create a shallower depth of field. If you want to take shots in doors then i would consider the F2.8. But not only is it a lot more expensive it's also a lot heavier.

a1ex2001 · 18 Jan 2008 at 10:41

The other advantage of the f2.8 is it will still give you good speed with a 1.4x or 2x tele converter which the f4 doesn't really this gives you much greater flexibility if you want a bit more reach. Another thing to consider is size and weight the 2.8 and the 2.8is are apparently pretty beafy.

Wang · 18 Jan 2008 at 11:41

Thanks for the advice everyone. I'm leaning towards just getting the F4 (non IS) for now as it isn't too expensive and see how i cope with that for a few months. then evaluate the situation mid summer, save a little money and maybe get the 300mm F4L IS

wez130 · 18 Jan 2008 at 15:32

the 70-200 is the best value for money lens you can buy, you won't go wrong

a1ex2001 · 18 Jan 2008 at 16:23

Just to throw something different into the pot, might be worth having a look at the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG Macro it gets some top notch reviews and is pretty competitvely priced.