Do I need a 70-200mm f2.8L IS II?

Started May 24, 2014 | Discussions thread
diness Veteran Member • Posts: 3,007
Re: Do I need a 70-200mm f2.8L IS II?

Phil Geusebroek wrote:

Thanks to everyone who posted:

- I don't think I strictly need it for the landscapes and travel stuff I mostly shoot, but do shoot the odd bit of wildlife that wanders in. Maybe the lens would have application for zooming composition with a 1.4x or 2x extender, but wonder about the image quality with the latter and it wouldn't outreach my 300mm f4 IS.

- I don't shoot weddings, sports or events on a regular basis. Once in awhile I'll bring the 135L or 200 f2.8L for informal stuff.

- I can afford it.

- I do mind the weight and the colour, but will try it if I'm missing out on something very useful. I've bought lenses not knowing their utility before and discovered things about them I really liked, and they became mainstays. This is why I'm asking what I might be overlooking in this lens.

Based on these things, I wouldn't bother with it.  Sounds like weight is an issue for you and so is the size and color...   Since you already have a 135L and a 200L which are both very sharp and are smaller and black... I would use those when you wanted 2.8 or larger aperture and didn't want the white color.  Then when you want the flexibility of the zoom you can use the 70-200 f4L IS.  Those three lenses you have area all incredibly good lenses and if they're less sharp than the 70-200 2.8 II it's not by much.  I would say keep what you have and enjoy it!  (or give them to me...)

 diness's gear list:diness's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Tamron SP 70-200 F2.8 G2 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 G2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow