70-200mm Zoom Lens
Jan 14, 2016 00:33:39 #
This lens appears to be a mainstay in most of the UHH bags. What are the main or best uses for this glass?
Jan 14, 2016 01:05:21 #
For a f4 version
'scapes
events in good light
portaits in good light.
any time you just want a bit more reach, in resonable light levels (and you cannot use a tripod).
Personally I didn't use my f4 a real lot, much preferring a 70-300 because of the extra reach.
For a f2.8 version
all of the above in addition to covering events, and when you want more reach, in low light levels (and you cannot use a tripod)
I now have an Olympus 40-150 f2.8 (80-300 in 35mm FOV terms) and I love it.
'scapes
events in good light
portaits in good light.
any time you just want a bit more reach, in resonable light levels (and you cannot use a tripod).
Personally I didn't use my f4 a real lot, much preferring a 70-300 because of the extra reach.
For a f2.8 version
all of the above in addition to covering events, and when you want more reach, in low light levels (and you cannot use a tripod)
I now have an Olympus 40-150 f2.8 (80-300 in 35mm FOV terms) and I love it.
Jan 14, 2016 01:11:48 #
It's probably easier to list what a 70-200 isn't good for. It's excellent for portraits and for weddings and indoor sports events and pretty much just about anything you can think of. Most good 70-200's are f/2.8 so they're fairly fast making them quite versatile. I actually have 2 of them, a Tamron and a Canon. I use one for family gatherings and birthdays and things like that. My 2 favorite general purpose lenses are the 70-200 and my 28-300. They're not real good for street photography, not wide enough and they're not great for photographing birds, not long enough, unless you use a teleconverter. If you don't have one I highly recommend getting one, you will be glad you did. One negative point, the good ones are fairly heavy but I haven't found that to be a problem.
Jan 14, 2016 02:49:52 #
robrory wrote:
This lens appears to be a mainstay in most of the UHH bags. What are the main or best uses for this glass?
rob, I have a 70-200 f4 that I almost always have with me because it's so small. That said, I rarely use it, much preferring the 100-400.
The 2.8's are as big as the 100-400 and many photogs are a little surprised at its size when they first get one.
90% of the time you can get away with the f4 versions. They are much smaller, lighter and 1/3 the cost for the non-IS version! Good luck with whatever you get!! ;-)
SS
Jan 14, 2016 05:08:17 #
robrory wrote:
This lens appears to be a mainstay in most of the UHH bags. What are the main or best uses for this glass?
"'takin pitures"
Jan 14, 2016 05:18:05 #
the only sore point for me is hand held action shots, because of it's weight. i'm old and have weak arms and shoulders.
Jan 14, 2016 07:02:51 #
robrory wrote:
This lens appears to be a mainstay in most of the UHH bags. What are the main or best uses for this glass?
Just one more pitch for the f/4. I have a 2X extender so with relatively little trouble I can go from 70 to 400. I have a camera that does well with high ISO so basically the lens is good for whatever fits in its field of view. At least for me, I need a tripod or some way to brace the camera at 200mm and beyond.
Jan 14, 2016 07:10:23 #
I have the Nikon 2.8 version and is one of my most used lenses. Great for portraits and indoor sports. Very sharp for these purposes. Put your left hand under the lens and hold camera with right and I think it balances out very nicely. At 71, I don't see a problem with weight at all.
Jan 14, 2016 07:18:14 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
For a f4 version br 'scapes br events in good li... (show quote)
For the 2.8 "all of the above" should include "all of the above even in lower light."
Jan 14, 2016 07:19:08 #
bull drink water wrote:
the only sore point for me is hand held action shots, because of it's weight. i'm old and have weak arms and shoulders.
Which is why you sport photographers with monopods.
Jan 14, 2016 07:19:51 #
juicesqueezer wrote:
At 71, I don't see a problem with weight at all.
Well of course not. At 71 look at how much practice you've had. :thumbup:
Jan 14, 2016 07:22:28 #
waegwan wrote:
Well of course not. At 71 look at how much practice you've had. :thumbup:
lol, true! Never gave that much thought!
Jan 14, 2016 08:48:14 #
juicesqueezer wrote:
I have the Nikon 2.8 version and is one of my most used lenses. Great for portraits and indoor sports. Very sharp for these purposes. Put your left hand under the lens and hold camera with right and I think it balances out very nicely. At 71, I don't see a problem with weight at all.
Ditto and I'm 74. One thing I will add is a monopod is useful when shooting sports as you often have your eye on the viewfinder for fairly long periods when following the action. ;)
Jan 15, 2016 07:54:28 #
robrory wrote:
This lens appears to be a mainstay in most of the UHH bags. What are the main or best uses for this glass?
Back in the analog days, the telephoto number was considered the aproximate max tele that you didnt need a tripod with as most people never used them.
As for the lower number of 70mm, most already had a standard lens and being they were going for telephoto, a 70mm was generally where a difference was noted.
In today's digital world, why change an acceptable practice?
As for "best use", that depends on what you shoot.
Jan 15, 2016 08:01:58 #
robrory wrote:
This lens appears to be a mainstay in most of the UHH bags. What are the main or best uses for this glass?
Portraits, and everything else.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.