Quote:
Originally Posted by xenigo
That's a nice lens, and one that I'd like to have personally... but it's such a long telephoto that it's not really usable for most purposes except for ones requiring some super long reach. I couldn't even use it in most locations because they don't have enough space. And, that's one heavy ass lens... I shot a wedding with one as a second shooter and my arm was trembling after a half hour... lol
|
I'll have to STRONGLY disagree with you on this. I use my 70-200 f2.8 lens on at least 85% of my work. Heavy you say? Perhaps, but it's all in what you get used to carrying/using.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Autofocus.html
This particular thread focuses on the use for sports which makes the 70-200 f2.8 one of the best possible options for the OP. Taking it a step further, it gives them the chance to add Canon's EF Extender II which will take them up to a 400mm f5.6 (I know, not a full frame camera so not a true 400mm but you get the idea)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...tender_II.html
Similar lens, good brand, way less money.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...2_8_II_EX.html
The EF Extender WILL NOT work on the 24-70 that you have but when it comes to sports, it's an inexpensive way to maximize the 70-200 lens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenigo
If you want to do any serious photography of any kind, you need to have an L lens with a constant aperture. The last thing you need is your aperture changing from 4.0 to 5.6 because you zoomed, and it totally fucks your exposure. With one of the L 2.8 zoom lenses, you'll never have to worry about that.
|
If they were doing "serious photography" then they would probably already know this. However, they are not. This person is using a Canon 40D and as with most 40D users, they probably rarely venture off of "Auto" mode. A constant stop lens is not needed for most practical applications.....Not that it hurts but why even mention it in this thread at all?