/p/ - Photography » Thread #3508263

[26 / 2 / ?]

Anonymous Fri 19 Jul 2019 22:10:03 No.3508263 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3508264 >>3508274 >>3508349 >>3508356 >>3508561 >>3508563 >>3508993 >>3509380 >>3509423 >>3513261

If I were to choose one lens to purchase and use as a multipurpose lens for my Canon DSLR, would the 70-200 2.8 be the right choice?

808 !!wuWc99Hdepg

808 !!wuWc99Hdepg Fri 19 Jul 2019 22:16:27 No.3508264 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
Whatever lens you honestly will take with you and use when you go and shoot. Will you be comfortable taking it everywhere with you if you decide to go shoot for hours? You have to have a decent sturdy tripod as well if you are taking landscape, the weight adds up and not a lot of photographers give that much of a shit to carry heavy.

Maybe a 24-70 or some 16-105 or whatever the fuck out there.

70-200 is really niche, I use it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 19 Jul 2019 22:57:28 No.3508274 Report

Quoted By: >>3508991 >>3511306

>>3508263
No. It's large and heavy, you'll develop rheumatitis in no time. And 70-200 really isn't general purpose lens anyway. 24-105mm is standard general purpose range. Canon 24-105mm f/4 for example. Could also look at 24-70's from Sigma, Tamron or Canon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 20 Jul 2019 01:25:27 No.3508349 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
50mm 1.8 for everything. It was the only lens I had for 2 years. Idk about canon but I would imagine they are on par with everyone else.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 20 Jul 2019 02:12:03 No.3508356 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
If you shoot exclusively classical portraits then sure. Otherwise probably get the 24-70 2.8 from Canon which is stunningly good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 20 Jul 2019 14:52:37 No.3508559 Report

Quoted By: >>3511309

Hijacking thread. Here's the deal: sold my Canon XSi that I've been shooting with since '08. Going to Hawaii in 2 months. I'm thinking I buy a full-frame body (6d) and one lens, possibly the Canon 16-35 f/4 IS. I've got about $1700 saved up so far.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 20 Jul 2019 15:10:08 No.3508561 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
imho 70-200s are the best all around due to the constant arms race between canikon to make the best sports shooter. there's less distortion at the ends than on a midzoom. if you care about wide, carry prime in your pocket.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 20 Jul 2019 15:11:16 No.3508563 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263

I exclusively use the 70-200mm and I love it, but would suggest picking up another lens to cover shorter focal lengths if you're trying to do anything other than portraits.

The weight of lens isn't that bad... just don't dangle it from your neck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 20 Jul 2019 15:49:55 No.3508593 Report

Quoted By:

As long as you're not indoors I personally love using the 70-200

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Jul 2019 10:34:16 No.3508991 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508274

Meh, I use my 70-200 than anything in my bag. It’s all relative to what you shoot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Jul 2019 10:37:29 No.3508993 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
If you have to ask: No, multiple lenses are the right choice.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Jul 2019 10:47:22 No.3509000 Report

Quoted By: >>3509001 >>3509226

With the 70-200 you have to stand pretty far back from things to fit them in the frame so its not good indoors.
Also its very zoomed in so not good for landscapes, you will only be able to fit a tiny bit of whats in front of you into the photo.

If you want to shoot birds or wildlife or sports, 200mm isnt much zoom.

Basically ive found that lens not good for much except shooting people outdoors and getting really generic blurred bg photos with pretty much all of the vibe of the location ignored because its so zoomed in.

Not sure why everyone raves about 70-200

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Jul 2019 10:51:37 No.3509001 Report

Quoted By: >>3509008 >>3509402

>>3509000
Not every landscape has to be ultrawide
A tighter focal length helps you pick out the order from the chaos
On an APS-C body a 70-200 with a teleconverter is great for birding

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Jul 2019 11:06:31 No.3509008 Report

Quoted By:

>>3509001
>Not every landscape has to be ultrawide
A bunch don't have to be, many do.

> A tighter focal length helps you pick out the order from the chaos
Or it may make the shot too boring and not show what you wanted to show. The right lenses for the right shots.

> On an APS-C body a 70-200 with a teleconverter is great for birding
IMO even that is only starting to be efficient on FF.

808 !!wuWc99Hdepg

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _AYY9349-HDR.jpg, 2MiB, 1280x1920

808 !!wuWc99Hdepg Sun 21 Jul 2019 19:01:01 No.3509226 Report

Quoted By:

>>3509000

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Jul 2019 02:59:53 No.3509380 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
I've actually really become fond of the 24-105. It's probably not as sharp as the 70-200, but it's a great utility lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Jul 2019 04:58:53 No.3509402 Report

Quoted By: >>3509407

>>3509001
I use portrait lengths for landscapes all the time. I think of it as taking a portrait of a sub-part of the landscape. Then again, I do the same for street photography which is also typically wide.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Jul 2019 05:02:01 No.3509407 Report

Quoted By: >>3509408

>>3509402

have sex

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Jul 2019 05:02:50 No.3509408 Report

Quoted By:

>>3509407
Once my gf gets off work

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Jul 2019 05:45:04 No.3509423 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
for a crop sensor? sure, i guess. i would much rather have a wide aperture prime lens at a 50mm equivalent focal length. you don't need a zoom with a shittier aperture

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Jul 2019 05:47:10 No.3509425 Report

Quoted By: >>3511099

70-200mm is going to suck so much balls because you would have to be 30 feet away from your subject

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 25 Jul 2019 05:40:13 No.3511099 Report

Quoted By:

>>3509425
>closest focusing distance is under 5 feet for all generations

So probably 10 feet to get, for example, a big owl in the picture.
Sounds like a perfect lens for lots of situations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 25 Jul 2019 12:16:40 No.3511306 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508274
I have a Sigma 18-200mm on my D7000, best multipurpose lens I've used.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 25 Jul 2019 12:21:17 No.3511309 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508559
blows my mind that people buy bigger cameras to carry around when they are travelling.

literally lighter = better
in this case

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 29 Jul 2019 06:47:39 No.3513261 Report

Quoted By:

>>3508263
24-70 f2.8 on a full frame sensor
or
17-40 f4 on a crop

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Aug 2019 02:48:43 No.3515115 Report

Quoted By:

Get the 24-70 and 70-200. You have all focal lengths covered for 99% of everything you're gonna shoot. You spend less time changing out lenses, and it's lighter than carrying multiple primes. Fast primes are for bokeh whoring

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches