Holy Trinity 70-200 2.8 VR Ii
Sep 21, 2014 02:39:45 #
jaygreen55
Loc: Westport CT
Mickey Mantle wrote:
This is the last piece of the holy trinity for me. Is it worth $2400? My favorite lens is the 24-70 2.8, but I have been blown away by the 14-24 2.8. What a beautiful lens. What should I do? Give into the GAS? How great is the 70-200? Will be using it on a d610
I bought the 70-200 2.8 but I found it so heavy to carry around that I rarely use it. The 70- 300 is what I use most of the time. With VR and today's ability to shoot at insane ISOs it's fast enough and produces pretty good images with a little lightroom work. I bought the 16-35 F4 over the 14-24 for the same reason
If I had it to do over again I would buy the 70-200 F4 over the 2.8. According to the reviews I read it has great IQ and is much lighter. I would definitely trade one stop of speed to save the weight. It's also a full 1000 dollars cheaper
Sep 21, 2014 02:52:23 #
You can go to SLR gear and do a comparison between the two versions. Also photozone.de. The consensus seems to be that the new version is clearly superior except in the corners at 70mm, and if you do close focus at 200mm. That being said the old version is still a very good lens.
The f4 version is very close in quality, though apparently not quite as good at 200mm. I'm willing to put up with the extra weight of the f2.8 for DOF reasons.
The f4 version is very close in quality, though apparently not quite as good at 200mm. I'm willing to put up with the extra weight of the f2.8 for DOF reasons.
Sep 21, 2014 02:55:05 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
jaygreen55 wrote:
I bought the 70-200 2.8 but I found it so heavy to... (show quote)
The f/4 zooms are excellent options for many over the f/2.8 zooms, sacrificing little to no image quality for significant savings in weight and cost. The 24-120mm f/4 would round out the "saintly trinity (?)".
Sep 21, 2014 03:05:04 #
Mickey Mantle wrote:
The lens that draws attention is the 14-24. What a beautiful piece of glass. B&H sells a thermos in the shape of a 70-200 2.8 for thirty dollars. A cheaper alternative, but I know I will not be happy until I get the real deal. What do you think, thermos or lens?
For the record, the thermos leaks. But the lens is awesome!!!
I only rented it. Then bought the Tamron version for a thousand less. My only regret is getting the 2X teleconverter rather than the 1.5. Losing 2 stops was just a little bit too much for my dusk time shooting.
If I could have afforded the name brand you can bet that I would have got it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.