carrying 70-200/2.8 around

jchin

If you use a 70-200/2.8L IS, can you shed some light on how you carry it around with you on an event shoot (banquet, wedding, party)? My normal mounted lens is a 24-105L or 50/1.4. I love to have my 70-200 with me. Do you carry your entire camera bag? Thanks.

tjstrider

It is always mounted and on my shoulder on another body,

one popular method though is a top loading messenger type bag... these can be cheap or expensive based on the leather or other factors but provide an easy bag on your side that is available for lots of extra stuff that you need to get at quick.

I would say if you have the 24-105 and then the 70-200 2.8 mounted you wouldn't need the 50 1.4 mounted constantly but my friends of the prime variety of course will disagree with that.

I'd go for a messenger type bag.

Scott_Quier

When I was working events, I would have two cameras (50D). One would have the 17-55 and the other the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. I used a pair of Black Rapid straps similar to what is seen here.

starlight

It would depend on the shoot, but if I'm using it, it would be on my primary or secondary body hanging over my shoulder. If I need other lenses mounted (low-light/etc) then it's in the bag *just in case*.

I am considering a waist mounted top loader, but so far I've been fine without.

xtnomad

I use mine for out door events that require a lot of walking. I attach it to a mono pod and throw it over the shoulder for the long hikes. It is easyer than toting the 400.

Photoskipper

I use an old 5D with the battery grip and 24-105 hangin on one shoulder.

The new 5D MkII with the 70-200 F2.8 IS on the other. Use a D lock hold the 2 straps together on my back. Put the lens mount on my belt to reduce the weight on the shoulder.

time2smile

Look into the Lowepro sliplock lens cases, you can attach then to your belt or neck strap. I use a #4 for my Tamron 70-200 F2.8 when I'm outdoors and dont want two bodies or a camera case with me.

babygodzilla

can someone explain what is so great about the 70-200 lenses that people are willing to pay so much for them and carry those huge beasts around? i've never used one so i am completely unfamiliar.

thanks

chrisjohnson

babygodzilla wrote: »

can someone explain what is so great about the 70-200 lenses that people are willing to pay so much for them and carry those huge beasts around? i've never used one so i am completely unfamiliar.

thanks

Take your camera into a photo store and ask to try a 70-200L. You'll see immediately why they are so popular with the pros.

I am still trying to forget how it felt and still kicking myself for not spending the money. It made my wife happy at the time and the 70-300 IS USM is not that bad

Scott_Quier

babygodzilla wrote: »

can someone explain what is so great about the 70-200 lenses that people are willing to pay so much for them and carry those huge beasts around? i've never used one so i am completely unfamiliar.

thanks

On either a cropper or a FF camera, this is a very flexible and usable zoom range. Also, this set of four siblings as a group (and singlely) is among the sharpest zooms Canon makes. Finally, for the huge one (the f/2.8L IS), this is a tool that, for some work (weddings, events, etc) that can not be easily replaced with any other lens (or set of primes).

jchin

Photoskipper wrote: »

I use an old 5D with the battery grip and 24-105 hangin on one shoulder.

The new 5D MkII with the 70-200 F2.8 IS on the other. Use a D lock hold the 2 straps together on my back. Put the lens mount on my belt to reduce the weight on the shoulder.

Can you show me a photo of how you hold the 2 straps together?

babygodzilla

Scott_Quier wrote: »

On either a cropper or a FF camera, this is a very flexible and usable zoom range. Also, this set of four siblings as a group (and singlely) is among the sharpest zooms Canon makes. Finally, for the huge one (the f/2.8L IS), this is a tool that, for some work (weddings, events, etc) that can not be easily replaced with any other lens (or set of primes).

im not really sure why its great for events, especially ones in small areas. using a 70-200, dont you have to stand pretty far from your subject? at 200mm you'll be well across the room. or is that the idea? to stay out of sight and catch candid moments like a papparazzi?

thanks

borrowlenses.com

If you don't have a second body just get a waist belt and a lens bag and just let the lens ride shotgun on your hip.

heatherfeather

babygodzilla wrote: »

im not really sure why its great for events, especially ones in small areas. using a 70-200, dont you have to stand pretty far from your subject? at 200mm you'll be well across the room. or is that the idea? to stay out of sight and catch candid moments like a papparazzi?

thanks

Not at all... I use it quite a bit for weddings, both ceremonies and receptions. This is with a FF from about 10 feet. You are able to get right up on them without them even knowing you are there... plus that creamy bokeh is just a bonus. Glorious fall off at 2.8.

babygodzilla

thanks! 10 feet at what focal length? 70 mm?

heatherfeather

Nope, 173mm

This one is at 120mm... of the same dance same conditions. I should have shot it at around 100mm and included the hands, but ah well.

I didn't have any of that set that were full 70mm





I don't usually take the 70-200 off for the reception except for the wide shots of the entire room. It is an excellent tool for weddings. I love that lens.

Though remember: these are shot with a full frame camera.

JohnBiggs

hmm. I only use my 70-200 for the ceremony. I guess I'll have to try it at the reception. But that leaves my 85 in an overlap.