Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS vs Non-IS??

ian408

'mum, I think Glort completely missed your point about the tools and reasons for using them.

Matthew Saville

Glort wrote: »

.....
I started an exercise a month or so back at the gym which is picking up a 50Lb Dumbell off the ground to shoulder height then lifting it over your head and holding it a bit then putting it on the floor again in a controlled way. That gets my heart pumping but I can usually just get out 3 sets at a time and it's definitely helping my shoulder and arm strength.
If the lens is the heaviest thing you are used to holding for long periods, build yourself up with something heavier that you can work up to and don't have to do all at one time.

Yeah, thanks for the input and encouragement. I've been thinking also of taking rock climbing back up, that seems to do a lot of upper-body stretching and it's more exciting that picking up heavy objects repeatedly. ;-)

=Matt=

Matthew Saville

divamum wrote: »

I'm so baffled by the responses above I'm not quite sure if I'm "implicated" or not (is mine the "alternative business model"?! Nothing I wrote was intended to imply that, but I'm entirely unclear if the responses were to me, Sam, or just in general ... lol) The point I was making, in case it wasn't clear, was that I wound up with the 2.8 not because I thought it was cool/fashionable/impressive/whatever, but because I get better pictures with it, and consistently. It's the right tool for *me* and the the job *I* do. I would never have bought it at full price (yet it has paid for itself several times over at the price I did pay for it).

And I would agree that if one is going for the "luxury" market, one is delivering not only photographs, but all the trimmings. That's why people are paying the bigger bux. In that discussion thread on the wedding business model earlier in the year, I think it was Matt who pointed out that up to a certain price point you're simply selling photographic skill; above a certain price point, you're selling the bedside manner/customer service/peresentation.... with surprisingly similar photographs.

At this point no, Glort and I were just having a discussion about the photography industry in general, not about any person's specific recommendations here in this thread.

As we've both mentioned, if you've got the money for a 2.8 IS mk2, and if you've got work coming in to pay for it, then it is certainly a great investment.

However, I think Glort summed it up very nicely when he talked about how you simply gotta do what you gotta do, if a different lens is more immediately attainable, then get it and get the job done, and keep saving.

=Matt=

Blurmore

I shoot a fair number of weddings at the "highest echelon" of society in DC, Willard, W, Mellon Auditorium, and I can say that it was less intimidating to see a guest at a party with a red dot around their neck when I was hauling a 500C/m. But at my experience level now, and the fact that many guests recognize me from other weddings, those with red dots, and 5D MkIIIs, D series, and me with a 7D, give me less pause now. In fact, I have thankfully noticed a trend that started last year, that only the less classy of wedding guests come geared to the nuptials, most of them are just like all the other idiots with their iphones. But like 3 years ago you couldn't sneeze without running into someone with a "better" camera than you. Oh, and for the 4th time is 13 years of shooting weddings yesterday, a guest asked me if I had any weed. People's assumptions...lol.

Glort

Blurmore wrote: »

Oh, and for the 4th time is 13 years of shooting weddings yesterday, a guest asked me if I had any weed. People's assumptions...lol.

That's a New one.
I have been offered god know what over the years but never asked for it.

The best offering I ever had was some real Cuban Cigars. I'm not a smoker but the groom gave me 3 of them and they were great. Lasted hours as well.