MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Photography Equipment => Cameras / Lenses => Topic started by: Xalanx on April 05, 2010, 13:29
-
I will buy THIS (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/129190-USA/Canon_2529A004AA_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2_8L.html) this Wednesday. Anyone having it? Any issues?
It will be primarily used as outdoor portrait / action lens, not in studio (too long). I preffered it over 135mm for the bit of extra reach and the way it takes the 1.4x TC.
-
There's 140 reports on here from users that seem to like it __ it's got a 9.8/10 rating.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=37&sort=7&cat=2&page=1 (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=37&sort=7&cat=2&page=1)
-
yea, FM forums is one of the first places to check when buying some gear. I find funny when at "Cons" some people write <<Its not a zoom>>. I mean - no, really?! ;D
-
I was satisfied with its performance and never had any issues with it. I bought it on the oft-told advice 'prime lenses are better than zooms', but ended up selling it because I wasn't using it enough to justify owning it - I often preferred to use a 70-200mm for the broader working range.
-
I was satisfied with its performance and never had any issues with it. I bought it on the oft-told advice 'prime lenses are better than zooms', but ended up selling it because I wasn't using it enough to justify owning it - I often preferred to use a 70-200mm for the broader working range.
Thanks for input. I'm mostly into primes, the only zoom I have is the 17-40mm f/4L and that's because the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II is too expensive for me now.
-
It is quite an awesome lens. It is sharp wide open, even better than the 135 2.0 which I always stop down to 2.2, but the 200 I always use wide open. It is a specialty lens, because indeed it is not a zoom :)
But it is one of my preferred lenses for outdoor portraits. I am a wedding photographer so I use it quite a bit for wedding portraits.
-
It is quite an awesome lens. It is sharp wide open, even better than the 135 2.0 which I always stop down to 2.2, but the 200 I always use wide open.
That's how I was planning to use it too. I heard is sharp from edge to edge wide open and that's important to me.
-
I was satisfied with its performance and never had any issues with it. I bought it on the oft-told advice 'prime lenses are better than zooms', but ended up selling it because I wasn't using it enough to justify owning it - I often preferred to use a 70-200mm for the broader working range.
My story exactly too. It had beautiful clarity, color, sharpness, etc. Just never used it because of the fixed focal length. I don't like to have to carry a bag full of lenses for a day of shooting, and there are very few days I would only want to shoot everything at 200mm.
-
Leg-zoom is more healthy, Lisa :D
-
While I am all for exercise, I would have to back into the next city, or more likely the Gulf of Mexico, to get a wide shot with that thing ;)
-
Or make a pano from like... 30 shots from where you stand, if you forget to put in the bag the little 17-40 ;D
-
I have it, just got back from the store now. Great glass, it's surely a keeper!