Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 16, 2005, 1:45 AM   #1
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

I had a sigma 70-200 f2.8 that worked great for a couple weddings, now I'd like to pick up something in the Canon family to take its place. Its nice to have a long tele for wildlife, but I've found a 70-200 with a 2x TC to be dissapointing. That said, I eventually want to pick up a 300 f4L IS for that with a 1.4x TC.

Now, my question is, which will be better for the <300mm range, the 70-200 f2.8L USM, or the 135mm f2L + a 1.4x TC? I already have the 85mm 1.8, and if the 135 was 77mm filters I would already have one, but currently it would be the only lens in my bag with 72mm, and I have such nice 77mm filters
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 16, 2005, 6:26 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

limbiksys wrote:
Quote:
Now, my question is, which will be better for the <300mm range, the 70-200 f2.8L USM, or the 135mm f2L + a 1.4x TC? I already have the 85mm 1.8, and if the 135 was 77mm filters I would already have one, but currently it would be the only lens in my bag with 72mm, and I have such nice 77mm filters
Have you check the MTF of the 135 f/2 against the 70-200 f/2.8? :O
How is it going to be better with a 1.4x TC on top of it? :idea:
(less bulk, faster, and cheaper may be... but you'll do the foot-zoom)

IMO I buy a filter to match a lens rather than compromise on a lens to match a filter which I already have...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2005, 11:14 AM   #3
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

I think I could probably get by with a 72-77mm step-up ring.
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2005, 2:01 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Caboose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 625
Default

my two cents worth, Canon L is really great stuff, but you already have a very good 70-200 f/2.8 in the Sigma, and you probably won't notice too much difference between tho two lenses, so unless you just have some money burning a whole in your pocket and already have all the other lenses you want. I would keep what you have and opt for another focal range lens. For weddings you already have a couple of pretty good lenses with the 85mm and the 70-200. Now the questions is do you want a lens for wildlife or weddings. For weddings I think you need something a little wider to go along with what you have. For wildlife you need more range.
Caboose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2005, 9:28 PM   #5
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

Well, I already sold the Sigma, not exactly because the lens was the problem (it was great), rather I was dissapointed with the lens and "matched" TC together. It seems that the Canon with TC performs slightly better, IMHO. But, that aside it opens me up to more options now. I also have a 50mm 1.4, a 28mm 1.8, and I'm going to check out a 20mm 2.8 (iffy reviews, but hey its cheap and 72mm even). Oddly enough with the primes I am getting used to NOT zooming, so the 135 might feel right at home, especially if I also have a prime with the 300mm (+1.4xTC for wildlife). I really wish dell sold the 300mm f4L IS, I have credit with them that IS burning a hole in something somewhere... They don't even sell the 135 f2L. In any case, I can use my 77mm filters on the 300mm, and a step-up ring on the 20mm and 135mm. That is what I am leaning towards at the moment anyhow. My other thought on the wide side was a few different lenses that all take 77mm filters (ie: the Sigma 10-20, Tokina 12-24 and Canon 10-22) but I have tried all but the Canon and decided that the cheap 20mm can probably hold me for a while.
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2005, 8:23 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

limbiksys

You might want to check the MTF of the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX against the EF-300 f/4L - It's practically a prime and slots right below the EF-300 f/2.8L (i.e. the blue curves are @ f/8 -> compares the black curves againt the red/green curves which are wide open)

BTW the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX HSM costs less than a 70-200 f/2.8 EX plus 1.4x teleconverter :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2005, 10:47 AM   #7
Member
 
limbiksys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 78
Default

The 300mm can be an f4 lens, that is not a problem. However, the <300mm range needs to be 2.8 or better for indoor. It would really be nice if there were an f2 macro lens in the 135-150mm range, because that is something I would also like to have, perhaps I can get by with an f2.8 macro but I'm not 100% sure about that.
One of the issues is the TC, I would like to have the lens in this range also work with the same 1.4x TC as I would put on the 300mm.
limbiksys is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:34 PM.