Question of the day
Bountyphotographer
Registered Users Posts: 413 Major grins
In a 3 months Ill have to opportunity to have a free
Camera Canon 7 D
or
Lens Canon 70-200 2.8
Currently Im shooting with my Canon 30 D , sigma 24-70 2.8 and am wondering if I should get the 7 D or the 70-200 ?????????????????????
What do you think?
Camera Canon 7 D
or
Lens Canon 70-200 2.8
Currently Im shooting with my Canon 30 D , sigma 24-70 2.8 and am wondering if I should get the 7 D or the 70-200 ?????????????????????
What do you think?
:photo
0
Comments
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
I can rent a 70-200 f4 for $40 (week-end) or the 70-200 f 2.8 for $ 50
To rent a 7 D its around $80 ish
I still have a old 75-300 mm but its 3.5 5.6 which in San Diego is ok I guess (it does a pretty decent job) but doesn t look really pro.
About the 70-200 f4 vs 2.8 besides the price is there a HUGE difference in quality?
Everybody I know swear ONLY by the 2.8 is it a must or just a trend/preference
But one way to consider it is this: the Canon 70-200 2.8 L has been on the market since 1995, replacing the 80-200 2.8L. So, purchasing the lens will basically last you a lifetime. On the other hand, Canon releases a new camera roughly every 2- 3 years or so, meaning that when you get the 7D, in about a year it will be 'old' replaced by another model.
The f/4 version is sharper than the original f/2.8 version. It is also half the weight, and a bit smaller. The f/2.8 Mark II is at least as sharp as the f/4, but it costs a lot more.
f/2.8 will give you twice the shutter speed as f/4. People buy the f/2.8 for low light use. f/2.8 will also activate the high precision mode of your center AF point. (assuming the 30D has that, I forget, but the 7D does)
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
All that said, I have 4 - 70-200mm-ish zoom lenses (a very important range for what I do) and of those I could do with just the Canon EF 70-200mm, f2.8L USM (non-IS).
I use the Canon EF 70-200mm, f4L IS USM mostly as a travel and outdoor event lens. Indoor stuff is always with the f2.8L.
(My other 2 zooms in this range are just backup and hazardous duty, nowadays.)
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
The lens is also really tempting but using a 30 D with a 70-200 2.8 ...............I don t know???
Anyway thanks a lot, I still have 3-4 months to go.
Bounty
A f2.8 70-200 and 30D is what I used for much of the last two years.
I've had that f2.8 lens through my entire newspaper career - one reporter spot, two editor sports, years of freelancing ... had that puppy 13 years. It's outlasted all my bodies (Elan II, 10d, 20d, 30d) and a couple of relationships.
If I had to do it all over again, good glass before body, every. Single. Time.
Or, as I think I mentioned, I slapped my f2.8 70-200 on the old 20d before I shipped the old body across the country to a buddy as a present. Rock. Solid. Images. Why? You can't beat good glass.
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
Good Luck with your decision.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Free? Really? The glass will hold it's value much longer than the camera. But Free?
Me? Besides doing a bunch of >bow I'd take the glass! Glass is Half full!
get more noise. So if you get a 7D and sell your 30D you could almost buy a used 70-200 f/4 allowing
you to shoot in the same light as with a 70-200 f/2.8 and an old 30D. Also the package will be lighter.
― Edward Weston
I do love taking pictures of sport though, but I feel cheated when I walk around with my Canon 30 D.
With my luck I'll get the lens and the 30 D will stop working in 4-5 month....I know im thinking too much
Here is a 7D shot of mine at 3200:
Hey if you don't need more than ISO 800 or 8mp, then maybe a 70-200/2.8 makes sense. But I'd rather have a 7D. I think people are having selective memories about old bodies. I'd take the money I saved and spend it on a 70-200 f/4L IS.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
I finally decided and got the lens Canon 70-200 2.8 a couple days ago.
I dont feel sorry at all concerning the canon 7 D because this lens is awesome.
The lens is so big that nobody can see my old 30 D anyway lol.
Didnt have time to shot yet, I only took quick snap shot but can tell right away that it is a great lens. It looks great,feels fantastic,autofocus in not time and really motivate me to go shoot portrait and sport photography.
So here it is the lens won and am pretty glad it did.
Thanks for all your input
Bounty
I'd get an old 5D. I have the 7D, and I want a 5D for goodness sake. The 5D is relatively cheap now...but, like you, I just spent $1,300 on a 70-200 2.8 IS. It will take some time for both my pockets, and my wife's "photographic purchase tolerance meter", to refill.
nice company benefit!
my vote would be for the 70-200 2.8
Holy crap I totally missed the free part...WAT.