Volkswagen Mark IV Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
I am still undecided on getting the IS 70-200 telephoto lense.Its just been re-released after some sort of problem.

Though its under ?400.How come yours cost so much,i am un educated on this sort of thing so enlighten me as ruthless'ly as you want to...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Basically it cost so much because of the quality of the construction and more importantly the glass used in it. It's a seriously precise bit of kit but you could drop it on concrete and it'd keep working.

The 70-200 L lens is pretty good but when i was looking for a long telephoto lens I ended up buying the 70-300mm USM IS and I used this for all my sports photography and found it to be as good for pic quality as the 70-200 L. Also the 70-200 L with IS is about ?800 so I think you're looking at the non IS lens which is still great and damn good value too.

have a look at http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidjgaunt/sets/72157594343506408/ and you'll see the shots I got from Silverstone and Rockingham. It's cheaper than the L too and has panning IS as well as regular correction IS which I find superb and essential for shots at full length without using a tripod. None of the shots on that link used a tripod, they were all totally freehand.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Yes that is the lens I use for sports pics and it's bloody awesome. If you want to take shots from a LONG way away like a full size footy pic it should do the job but I'd think about borrowing one first to see if it has the distance for it. Since you and I have cropped sensors any lens will be actually 1.6 times the focal length so that 300mm one will actually extend to 480mm which is pretty good for the money.

I really cant fault the lens and I used it for the last wedding too. It's great and you'll love it if you buy it. I think the lens would reach well to get good shots of players to about the middle of the pitch but to really get into the action you need something longer like a 400mm which are well expensive. Get this to start with and you'll be well away.

Where abouts are you from as you're welcome to come and try mine out or I can have a wander over to a footy pitch with mine and see how it fairs if you like?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,029 Posts
Cracking lens, a mate of mine has one on his 30D and its sharp beyond belief at times.

I've just ordered my early Xmas pressie.... FINALLY managed to find one in stock somewhere (still like rocking horse poo), a lovely Nikkor 18-200 VR

Posted Image
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,586 Posts
I guess the fixed aperture throughout the zoom makes a difference to the price as well! Nice lens though.

I'm after a 70-300 for my D50 although I've seen good reviews of the 70-210 so that might be a possiblity. Chris, that lens has such amazing reviews - if only I could afford to splash out on it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Dunno if it's bad luck with the lens or my camera but i'm getting very poor shots with this. very poor.

Cant be arsed with getting another one so i'm flogging my camera and upgrading soon.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,204 Posts
Dunno if it's bad luck with the lens or my camera but i'm getting very poor shots with this. very poor.

Cant be arsed with getting another one so i'm flogging my camera and upgrading soon.
In what way are the pictures very poor?

Chris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Come on Ved, answer the man.

Thanks for the offer for a play with yours but i am on the I.W .

Anyways,i want to know what is wrong with your lens , same a Chris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,029 Posts
I also know a couple of Canon owners (30D and 5D) who were unimpressed with certain L glass. I guess the thing is, its a perfect marketing tool for Canon, because everyone's bought into the whole 'red L' thing, when as i've mentioned, some Canon users i know have found lenses from Tamron and Sigma to be sharper, better, and a whole chunk cheaper.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,204 Posts
I've not had any real time to play with borrowed L lenses,but I guess I was also expecting some sort of holy grail.I took about 20 shots with one,and took the same with my 50-500mm Sigma,and I can honestly say that the results with the Sigma were near as damnit identical to the L glass,and in some cases I actually prefered the results of my Sigma lens at half the cost.The only way the L wins over the Sigma for me is that is quite a bit faster,I think F2.8 max.

Chris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
sorry for the late reply guys, not been on here much. the problem as that both lenses i tried have been VERY soft and the focusing was awful. Both front focused and were worse that the kit lens i got with the 350D. Basically I was shocked at how poor they were so it went back.

I'm now going for a 5D and the 24-105mm L lens soon which I expect to be nothing short of awesome.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,204 Posts
Aaarrhh right,where was the lens soft,max or minimum zoom,and/or max or minimum aperture,or just generally soft everywhere? I also wouldn't expect anything like that from anything carrying the price tag of an L lens,and especially not the focussing problems,my cheapest Canon lens is a ?70 all plastic 50mm F1.8,and at F8 it is so sharp it's untrue.(At F1.8 it looks like a camera phone photo!)

Chris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,851 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I'm taking a 1.8 50mm to my baby photo gig on the weekend! the L was soft and out of focus all over particularly at F/4.0. With lower apertures it was slightly better but if it says F/4.0 I expect it to perform for ?700.

Hopefully the 5D will a proper bedfellow for it as I'll be buying that with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Dude, what is a "baby photo gig"

I'm thinking a bunch of push chair clad rockers,with there (probally the wrong "there") drum sets and guitars ...
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top