I need some lens advice! I have been shooting portraits with my Canon 70-200 f2.8L Non-IS lens. I keep the iso at about 100 to keep it sharp, as I find that the higher iso the grainier...

Rangerfan

I have been shooting portraits with my Canon 70-200 f2.8L Non-IS lens. I keep the iso at about 100 to keep it sharp, as I find that the higher iso the grainier the pics. I have been shooting outdoors, so I was thinking the light would be sufficient. However, because I am handholding and this is a giant heavy lens, I am not getting sharp pics in the least. Also, I am really getting in pet photography. I was wondering if it is because
1. I am handholding and there is camera shake?
2. The iso is still too low, causing the shutterspeed to be too slow?
3. I really need an is lens?
Also, I am finding that this lens, although wonderful as it is, is not the best choice for what I do. I am thinking of selling it and getting either the 24-70 or the 17-55. Any thoughts??? The 24-70 is non-IS and the 17-55 is IS. I don't want to make the same mistake again not getting IS if I am a handholder and not a tripod user.

Swamp Gator Loc: Coastal South Carolina

Well that is an excellent lens that is certainly capable of producing tack sharp images.
What are your shutter speeds dropping down to? You didn't mention that.
If they are much slower then 200 camera shake could be an issue especially if you feel the lens is too heavy and you are having a tough time holding it still handheld.

If you conclude the 70-200 2.8 is too unwieldy for your intended uses then consider Canon's 24-105 f4 L
It will give you a bit more reach then those others you mentioned. This could be helpful because you would not have to get on top of your subjects to get your shots.

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

What kind of camera are you using? I also have a 70-200 f2.8, and love it (non IS). Shutter speed and focus point is the issue for sharpness (for the most part). Are you a shakey hand holder? You would know best. Do you use handholding techniques that help eliminate shake (like leaning against something or elbow in to your side)? Have you thought of using a monopod? It is a heavy lens, granted. Keeping the iso low is not the answer to all noise issues. Better to pump up the iso a bit for proper exposure, than to try and lighten it later (that causes lots of noise). If your goal is mostly portraiture, that lens can and does work great. I also have the 24-70 f2.8, which is also a fabulous lens. All lenses have their purpose, I wouldn't be so quick to sell a lens. I would suggest keep adding to your lens arsenal. As your photography continues to evolve, you may find that you wish you still had it.

Val Loc: Minnesota

Rangerfan wrote:

I have been shooting portraits with my Canon 70-20... (show quote)

You should be able to bump the ISO to at least 400 without adding grain to your images. Make sure your shutterspeed is at least 1/60. Anything slower you may need to use a tripod. I have that lens and always set my ISO for outdoor shots to at least 400 unless I am using a flash and my images are not grainy. I also have the 24-70 mm lens and get tack sharp images even though it doesn't have IS. I am wondering what your shutterspeed has been.

Ray and JoJo Loc: Florida--Tenneessee

Check your f/ stop if your shooting at 2.8 you need to check on a lens with larger opening (1.4, 1.8) not the focal length where your can shoot faster. 100-400 iso should be fine

PWhisperer Loc: Allentown, PA

This is a perfect example why its not cost effective to buy high dollar equip without knowing how to use it first.

Rangerfan

PWhisperer wrote:

This is a perfect example why its not cost effective to buy high dollar equip without knowing how to use it first.

ouch.

Rangerfan

Val wrote:

quote=Rangerfan I have been shooting portraits wi... (show quote)

My shutter speed was around 1/160 to 1/200 due to the fact that it was very overcast.

Rangerfan

skidooman wrote:

What kind of camera are you using? I also have a 7... (show quote)

I am using a Canon Rebel T2i. Right now it I only have the budget for 1 expensive lens. I have my kit lens (18-55), a 50-300, a 50 1.8, and the 70-200. I got a great deal on the 70-200 on ebay, so my thinking was if I can have ONLY one really good lens what would be the best for me. I could easily sell the 70-200 on ebay for what I bought it for.

Swamp Gator Loc: Coastal South Carolina

Is your main interest shooting outdoor portraits?
How much do you think you could get for the 70-200?
You could get an 85mm 1.8, 100mm f2, or 135mm 2.8 for cheap (relatively speaking) or as I previously suggested the 24-105 f4 is excellent but more $.

You may also wish to consider using one or more flash units for outdoor portraits especially for those dimmer days.
Plus you don't want to necessarily stick someone out in direct sun on those bright days either.

Rangerfan

Swamp Gator wrote:

Is your main interest shooting outdoor portraits?
How much do you think you could get for the 70-200?
You could get an 85mm 1.8, 100mm f2, or 135mm 2.8 for cheap (relatively speaking) or as I previously suggested the 24-105 f4 is excellent but more $.

You may also wish to consider using one or more flash units for outdoor portraits especially for those dimmer days.
Plus you don't want to necessarily stick someone out in direct sun on those bright days either.

Those are all great suggestions. What type of flash unit do you recommend. I get overwhelmed when i see how many there are.

Swamp Gator Loc: Coastal South Carolina

I believe the Canon Speedlite 430EX II Flash is supposed to pair up well with various Canon DSLR's
Not cheap though at around $285.
There may be a model down from that you will have to check it out.

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

Rangerfan wrote:

PWhisperer wrote:

This is a perfect example why its not cost effective to buy high dollar equip without knowing how to use it first.

ouch.

eddiel66

A general rule of thumb is to be sure that the shutter speed is the reciprocal of the focal length. So if the lens is set to 100mm for your portrait, be sure the lens speed is 1/100 or faster. (Faster is better). Also, with that camera you can probably use iso of 200 to 400, with almost no noticeable noise or "graininess"

Rangerfan

eddiel66 wrote:

A general rule of thumb is to be sure that the shutter speed is the reciprocal of the focal length. So if the lens is set to 100mm for your portrait, be sure the lens speed is 1/100 or faster. (Faster is better). Also, with that camera you can probably use iso of 200 to 400, with almost no noticeable noise or "graininess"

I actually just read that in Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure. Makes sense. That was my problem I think. But I'm still thinking I want something a little less weighty maybe and something with a shorter focal range. My kit lens is crappy and that's the only lens I have for that purpose.