Got a 70-200 2.8 !

£400 is a bargain... I was wooing and ahhing between the 70-200mm f2.8 and the 50-150mm f2.8. Went with the latter for the size and all, what's the point of a lens when I'm not going to be carrying it around often due to its weight?

Despite it's slight front focusing, I love my 50-150mm. Long enough for me to get closer in street photography, yet short & discreet enough for me to carry and shoot subtly.
 
twoblacklines said:
I thought you had to buy canon to be "in" on this forum, or does that only apply to bodies ?
Click to expand...

Its not about BUY a brand, its about reasoning behind the purchase and the ability to make use of it.

Buying a L doesn't automatically make you Mario Testino. but if you are as good as him, then you should be buying the best.

I don't use a 70-200 so it would be a WASTE of money to get a £1600 version when i can do most of that with this £400 one. That makes sense to me.

Its not about in, its about why.
 
If your not going to use a 70-200 its a waste to spend £400 on one when you can rent the 70-200L off lenspimp for £80 for 7 days isnt it ?
 
twoblacklines said:
If your not going to use a 70-200 its a waste to spend £400 on one when you can rent the 70-200L off lenspimp for £80 for 7 days isnt it ?
Click to expand...
Firstly, it's more like £113 once you start including postage.

So instead of owning a tack-sharp £400 Sigma lens that he can use whenever he wants and doesn't have to book in advance you'd advise him to hire a Canon lens that he'd only be able to use for a little under 3-weeks before having blown the same amount of money?

Illogical, Captain.

Still, I'm sure he knows what he's doing. He is one of the best wedding photographers I've ever clapped eyes upon, after all.
 
Don't worry, TBL thought it'd have been a good idea to spend an extra £500 on a D700 rather than getting a D300 so he could use his Nikkor 50 1.8 AF-D.
 
Raymond Lin said:
At the moment, it is not worth investing that kind of money on one for me, i rather get a 85/1.2 or a 45 T/S instead.
Click to expand...
I can't understand either of those lenses for someone like your good self.

Assuming we're talking weddings here, isn't the 85L going to be too slow to focus and the 45 TS-E going to be a pain to use hand-held?

Sorry to further derail your thread, but I'm really curious about you using those two lenses!
 
glitch said:
I can't understand either of those lenses for someone like your good self.

Assuming we're talking weddings here, isn't the 85L going to be too slow to focus and the 45 TS-E going to be a pain to use hand-held?

Sorry to further derail your thread, but I'm really curious about you using those two lenses!
Click to expand...

Portraits and engagements sessions captain ;)

I want to start doing some of those and in those I can take as long as I need.
 
Just got one of these myself (I say just, it was last month but not had a good go with it yet) after borrowing one at a wedding. Mine was only £340 but missing the paint/collar. Really is fun to use but like yourself I only got it to save myself renting a lens every other month as 17-50 does most of the stuff I like shooting.
 
you will enjoy the lens. Mine served me well and either the 85 L or any TSE lens is dream land territory for me.

before going for the 85L i would be interested to see how the sigma 85mm 1.4 will compare. will it be a nice inbetween canon's 1.8 and 1.2. Could save you a few more quid. (depending on how long you will wait for a new toy)
 
now i didnt see this thread starting with a pic of the sigma..

but im glad. youll love it :)

to the person asking about EX and full frame, EX is just sigmas version of L. its the DG and DC types you need to look out for, DC is for 1.6 crop and DG will fit anything. (DC will work on 1.3 and FF but youll get vigenetting).

and to the other person saying its slow focusing.. what were you shooting because it easily tracks motorsport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom