Tell me again why the 70-200L IS is so big.

[Debbie F.]

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon 70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,
Thanks,
Debbie

 

[Gary Fetting]

Rest assured, you have a great lens there. Quality of the optics, F2.8, Image Stabilizer.

--
Gary F

 

[Gabriel Philipson]

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the
way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site
printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them
had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon
70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He
asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and
zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I
bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a
GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,
Thanks,
Debbie

Reach is only one factor. The maximum aperture is just as important if not more so in determining the size and weight of a lens. What was the max aperture of his lens? I'd venture to guess it was not 2.8.

OTOH, it doesn't sound like you made a particularly informed decision when you purchased your lens. Just b/c it's highly recommended is, IMO not a very good reason for purchasing a lens. Your lens can be indispensable for someone who needs fast shutter speeds in mediocre lighting. Otherwise, it is most likely a waste and your situation would probably be better served with the f/4 version, which would be lighter, both in your hands and wallet.

 

[DavidP #28649]

You have an f/2.8 lens. He probably had a lens that was f/5.6 at the 210mm setting.

That means that your lens is capable of gathering 4 times as much light as his can.

To do this, the lens diameter must be larger in diameter. By a factor of 2.

BTW, the 70-200/4 is a great lens, too. Much lighter, and less expensive (but no IS). But it doesn't have the aperture that that f/2.8 lens does.

I get the comment all the time about how big my lens is. People don't believe me when I point out soembody with a 75-300/4.5-5.6 and say that it has more "reach" than my lens does.

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the
way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site
printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them
had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon
70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He
asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and
zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I
bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a
GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,

--
http://www.outboundmusic.com
Your link to independent music!

 

[photogeek]

NO TEXT

 

[Debbie F.]

It was the most recommended for my needs. I did alot of research and asked alot of questions before purchasing it. Was shocked at the weight and size when I got it in. Just really couldn't explain why it was so big and heavy.

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the
way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site
printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them
had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon
70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He
asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and
zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I
bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a
GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,
Thanks,
Debbie

Reach is only one factor. The maximum aperture is just as
important if not more so in determining the size and weight of a
lens. What was the max aperture of his lens? I'd venture to guess
it was not 2.8.

OTOH, it doesn't sound like you made a particularly informed
decision when you purchased your lens. Just b/c it's highly
recommended is, IMO not a very good reason for purchasing a lens.
Your lens can be indispensable for someone who needs fast shutter
speeds in mediocre lighting. Otherwise, it is most likely a waste
and your situation would probably be better served with the f/4
version, which would be lighter, both in your hands and wallet.

 

[Kam Chan]

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the
way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site
printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them
had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon
70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He
asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and
zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I
bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a
GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,
Thanks,
Debbie
Please see my photos taken with this lens

http://www.pbase.com/k_chan/visit_to_the_zoo

 

[Gabriel Philipson]

It was the most recommended for my needs. I did alot of research
and asked alot of questions before purchasing it. Was shocked at
the weight and size when I got it in. Just really couldn't explain
why it was so big and heavy.

Gabriel Philipson wrote:

It sounds as if you COULD make good use of this lens if you are shooting MX (motocross?) races in questionable light. Do you have any samples?

Have you found it necessary to shoot wide open to maintain an acceptable shutter speed?

Are these races ever in twilight, indoors or at night with artificial lighting?

Are you trying to maintain very high shutter speeds (> 1000)?

If the above listed things apply to you then I imagine you could make very good use of your lens and receive spectacular results for your effort, while that other guy with the tiny lens would probably only receive a lesson in frustration.

If however, lighting is not a problem, I would imagine the f/4 version would be more than adequate. The IS doesn't do much for you when shooting moving objects.

Good luck

 

[anyu]

It's big in order to scare away small children and old ladies so they won't get in the way for your shots. And to make the other big guys with teeny weeny cameras beside you feel....inadequate...
I really love this lens
Regards/Anna
http://www.pbase.com/annayu2/

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the
way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site
printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them
had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon
70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He
asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and
zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I
bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a
GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,
Thanks,
Debbie

 

[josian gattermeier]

You got it right, that's what I used to feel like... inadequate... when I had P&S cameras 8 or 9 years ago, next to a guy with these HUGE lenses... and yes, little children and elderly ladies would definately run away from it.

this weekend I was out shooting MX races. It was awsome by the
way. Anyway, there was one Pro out there with a tent and on site
printing and there was a guy who shoots as a hobby. Both of them
had small zoom lenses and here I am walking around with my Canon
70-200/2.8L IS. The nice guy (hobbiest) and I were talking. He
asked me why my lens was so big. His was a Tamaron. Small and
zoomed to 210mm. I couldn't explain why it is so big. LOL I
bought this lens because it was the most recommended and I wanted a
GOOD lens. Can someone reassure me on why it's the best.
Just wondering,
Thanks,
Debbie