Which lenses do you own/need

[lotusfan]

Tuna said:

lotusfan said: i have the 100-400 IS L and the IS is not a lot of use for football under floodlights so a 2.8 is a must and as i dont need IS i get to save £500 or so, cant really afford to shell out for a 300 / 400 either so best compromise, the F4 version is almost half the price of the 70-200 so i guess thats why its there, if you're not on low light you can get away with an F4 i suppose. I was just going to suggest to Bob he consider that lens, as he seems to be planning mainly daylight photography. www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_100400_4556_is/index.htm It would certainly be a nice addition to my kit, but I still think I'd prefer a zoom with a wider aperture.

daylight - fabulous lens (providing the target isn't too close) low light - great - switch on IS shoot it dark and raise the levels. dark and moving target (and by dark i mean under floodlights) you cant get sufficient shutter speed because of the aperture limit.
other than that its a great all rounder, if a bit weighty.

[UKBob]

Tuna said:

lotusfan said: i have the 100-400 IS L and the IS is not a lot of use for football under floodlights so a 2.8 is a must and as i dont need IS i get to save £500 or so, cant really afford to shell out for a 300 / 400 either so best compromise, the F4 version is almost half the price of the 70-200 so i guess thats why its there, if you're not on low light you can get away with an F4 i suppose. I was just going to suggest to Bob he consider that lens, as he seems to be planning mainly daylight photography. www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_100400_4556_is/index.htm It would certainly be a nice addition to my kit, but I still think I'd prefer a zoom with a wider aperture.

Id rather have the IS to be honest. And (I think) I need it... for indoor use, in all sorts of low light situations. Plus Im not a huge fan of tripods. I just dont like the price.

[ehasler]

UKBob said:

Plus Im not a huge fan of tripods. I just dont like the price.

Says the man who's looking at spending >£1k on his first lens

A decent tripod is probably one of the best things you can buy, unless you prefer taking rushed wonky photos

[UKBob]

ehasler said:

UKBob said: Plus Im not a huge fan of tripods. I just dont like the price. Says the man who's looking at spending >£1k on his first lens

We got on well before, why dont I just borrow your 70-200 IS instead
[creepy-voice]I know yoooooove got one!! [/creepy-voice]

ehasler said:

A decent tripod is probably one of the best things you can buy, unless you prefer taking rushed wonky photos

Agreed. Ive got a crappy tripod (will post a pic one day so we can all have a chuckle - Just imagine 3 very long telescopic straws) but if IS gives a much better pic in low light than a non IS lenses, I wont be needing the tripod as often

[Andy M]

I think you might be putting too much confidence in IS to be honest. Is there no way you could hire/borrow a camera with the 70-200 IS attached?

[matt gravy]

ive got some lenses:

17-40mm for rig shots or anything else wide angle
28-70mm for static shots, tracking shots, portraits and some panning shots (good general purpose lens)
28-135mm IS for panning, rig and tracking shots (another good general purpose lens and the first one I got)
100-400L for doing any of the above (except rig and tracking) from far away.

I dont need anything else really. I tried the 70-200IS but found it a bit of an awkward focal length. May as well just use a 100-400 IMO. Also, you should stop fannying about and get a tripod.

Try get sucked into the upper echelons of the geek babble that goes on here, we used to share and discuss photos, but now we are too busy comparing memory cards and f-stops

before you spaz out at me im at least 10% joking

[UKBob]

Andy M said:

I think you might be putting too much confidence in IS to be honest. Is there no way you could hire/borrow a camera with the 70-200 IS attached?

I could borrow one to test it out, but review after review on www.fredmiranda.com and other sites has people raving about it. If IS is less than one half as good as they say it is, Id really rather buy a lens with IS.

Even if it means waiting, its an expensive lens. I dont want to be without a wider angle lens for more than 6 weeks, depends on the cashflow like all things in life.