70-200mm f/2.8G VR II alternatives - weight

Started Jul 17, 2015 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
carlosvitor Regular Member • Posts: 108
70-200mm f/2.8G VR II alternatives - weight

Hello,

I'm thinking on buying a 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II for indoors events, outdoors portraits (couple, kids, family) and eventually taking photos of kids playing sports or dancing at an auditorium, for example.

For walking around lens, I use a 35mm or 50mm f/1.8G. I prefer them over a 24-70mm f/2.8G because of their light weight and wider aperture. Up to now I have no problems using prime lenses instead a standard zoom for framing. But for longer focal length, I don't know if it's better using a zoom lens, and that's why I'm considering a 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II and its 1.5kg.

Lighter alternatives lenses: 85mm f/1.8G, 105mm f/2.8G VR, 135mm DC, 70-200mm f/4G, etc.

Each one has their compromises: not long enough, slower AF, no VR, or not fast enough.

I'd like to know if somebody has had any problem dealing with the 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II weight (and when using two cameras on a double Black Rapid). I'm young but not a big guy, so I'm worried hurting my back or getting a tendinitis.

Thank you!

ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow