Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Help with settings
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
Oct 1, 2017 14:53:49   #
Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina
 
Cookie,

I think either is a great lens but I think the 70-200 2.8 II is more versatile overall. Especially if you want to bring it indoors to shoot too. Keep us posted and if you have any questions you can post here or PM me.

Best,
Todd

Cookie223 wrote:
Todd,
I'm leaning more and more towards the 70-200 II. From what you're telling me, and a couple of others, it should be a better combo with the 1.4 III too. I already have the Canon 50mm 1:1.4 AF/MF lens.
Hopefully I'll have my new lens sometime late next week or the next, and I'll give you folks an update.
Take care
Cookie

Reply
Oct 1, 2017 15:16:32   #
Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey
 
davefales wrote:
I like No.5 best but would like to see it cropped with her more to the left, creating an open space she is running towards. IMHO.


Thanks for the great idea.

Reply
Oct 1, 2017 16:20:08   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
Cookie223 wrote:
Todd,
I'm leaning more and more towards the 70-200 II. From what you're telling me, and a couple of others, it should be a better combo with the 1.4 III too. I already have the Canon 50mm 1:1.4 AF/MF lens.
Hopefully I'll have my new lens sometime late next week or the next, and I'll give you folks an update.
Take care
Cookie


Can’t go wrong with a 70-200 f2.8 (as long as you can live with the weight) - if I had to pick only one lens to keep, it would be the one. At a recent seminar held by the photographers of our local paper, (which employs 9 photographers), every one of the 5 presenters (which included portraiture, sports, events, food photography, etc) had a 70-200 f2.8 as one of the 2-3 “go-to” lenses in their kit.

Reply
 
 
Oct 1, 2017 16:37:42   #
Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey
 
TriX,
With that kind of an endorsement how could I go wrong? I really do like mine, and with the enhancements the II has it will be my new lens.
Thanks,
Cookie

Reply
Oct 1, 2017 16:45:02   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
Cookie223 wrote:
TriX,
With that kind of an endorsement how could I go wrong? I really do like mine, and with the enhancements the II has it will be my new lens.
Thanks,
Cookie


😎 Yep, the MKII is definitely sharper.

Reply
Oct 12, 2017 00:23:30   #
jdedmonds
 
Maybe it's age-related memory loss, but the idea of reading, page by page, the manual for my D810 and emerging with a mastery of the camera seems like a different world from that in which I live. Half an hour per page of the Nikon manual (which mostly just regurgitates the labels already on the camera or in the firmware) amounts to around 250 hours-eleven days. On the other hand, I could read the infinitely better Thom Hogan 810 manual (960+ pp.) in a little under five hundred hours. I already know that even the D810 has more features (many of them gimmicks) than I'll ever use or want. It's a lot like the new Tahoe I bought about a year ago; the dash etc. displays are overwhelming, and I'd bet have caused a fair number of accidents when drivers are trying to figure out how to do something. Maybe it's apparent from the foregoing, but I'll say it anyway: I think that a bazillion more features are unnecessary, unintelligible and unlearnable. There, I've got it off my chest.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.