| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/30/2006 10:49:09 PM · #1 |
| I do outdoor photography landscapes and wildlife. Since these lenses are about the same price price I'm having a hard time deciding which one I'd get. 70-200 obviously is a great lens as everyone knows but is 200mm enough for wildlife (birds, etc.)? On the other hand the 70-300mm has IS and an extra 100mm of focal length. Which would you pick and why? Thanks for any help you can offer. |
|
|
|
05/30/2006 10:59:00 PM · #2 |
IMO, I would go with the L lens for sharpness alone. Plus, you have the advantage of the f/4 throughout the focal length.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2006 10:59:07 PM · #3 |
| Sorry I thought I was in the Hardware forum. I'll repost this there. :) |
|
|
|
05/30/2006 11:00:28 PM · #4 |
| 70-200 is not enough for satisfying wildlife shooting. In a zoo yes but in the outdoors, not a chance. It is the better of the two lenses though. If you can, get the 70-200 and start saving for the Canon 100-400L or the 400L prime. Now yer talkin wildlife! |
|
|
|
05/30/2006 11:16:16 PM · #5 |
I agree, if you shoot wildlife in, well, the wild you'll want more than 200mm; even 300mm is a little short. So it becomes a tradeoff between length and speed. I'd go for the 70-200/4 and a 1.4x TC, which will give you nearly the same reach as the 70-300, only without the IS. The 70-200 is a better lens without a doubt.
For longer reach, consider getting the 400/5.6 later on. |
|
|
|
05/30/2006 11:17:45 PM · #6 |
Why do you need IS for outdoor pix?
I think the answer is clear.
Message edited by author 2006-05-30 23:18:06.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2006 11:18:56 PM · #7 |
Enough cant be said about the 70-200/F4, its just a killer lens for the price-- But for your needs I would have to agree that the 100-400/l might be better suited, or even the Bigma.
Message edited by author 2006-05-30 23:19:15.
|
|
|
|
05/30/2006 11:26:30 PM · #8 |
I would add-- take a look at my now out-dated Pbase gallery--
Most of the pics are with the 70-200.. Look around including wildlife/chads yamaha series/friends/ sat snaps/ even hockey (that was all iso 800/1600 though)
buzz Pbase
|
|
|
|
05/31/2006 12:59:28 AM · #9 |
70-200mm 4L with one of these Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG x1.4 TCs can get you out to almost to 300mm with the same sharpness and detail of 4L.
I picked up the x1.4 model new on ebay for $150.00 (shipped from Hong Kong but I arrived in 6 days) and it works well with all my lens (unlike the way more expensive canon model). I haven't seen any loss of detail. The x1.4 will take you to a f/5.6 but I haven't ran into any problems shooting out doors at that ap.
Andy
Message edited by author 2006-05-31 01:01:05. |
|
|
|
05/31/2006 04:32:11 AM · #10 |
| get the 300mm f2.8 :) hehe |
|
|
|
05/31/2006 05:11:06 AM · #11 |
L series my opinion...
check the reviews...
you cant go wrong with L |
|
|
|
05/31/2006 05:16:57 AM · #12 |
Get the 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L I use it for my wildlife photography and love it plus I also have the 1.4* converter. The push pull system gets some getting used to but its so good if you are shooting to find the subject at 100mm then you can quickly zoom in to 400m on the subject OK it is 5.6f but i have not had problems with this.
Good luck with your decision
Cowie
|
|
|
|
05/31/2006 05:41:21 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by jellyoooo:
L series my opinion...
you cant go wrong with L |
Canon marketing at its finest. :)
But seriously, for wildlife, you need all the reach you can get. Even though the 70-200/4 is definetly sharper, all the sharpness in the world is useless if you can't get close enough. I have a 50-200mm + 1.4x, that is about equal to 560mm with full frame, and there are many times I need more. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/02/2025 01:59:39 PM EDT.
