Lenses help

[makan007]

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM - $3000
Minimum Aperture - 32
Closest Focusing Distance (m/ft) - 1.5 / 4.9
Filter Size (mm) - 77

EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM - $700
Minimum Aperture - 22-38
Closest Focusing Distance (m/ft) - 1.5 / 4.9
Filter Size (mm) - 58

Qns:

1. What is the main reason for the large price difference?

2. Which is a better choice since I want to zoom to get better pic but with low budget.

 

[ziploc]

Answers:

1. One is "L" lens the other is nornal lens, of course the price different.
2. Why would zooming give you better pic? Low budget, get the cheaper lens lor. 3rd party lenses are even cheaper.

 

[Jed]

The main reason for the large price difference is the minimum aperture. With the 70-200 you are getting a lot more glass to achieve the fast 2.8 maximum aperture. In addition, because the 70-200 is pro glass, you are getting much better build quality as well. A lens which will stand up to the regular whacking that pros will give it.

If you're on a low budget, then just go with the 100-300. If you're not doing professional work you can probably live with it quite comfortably.

 

[makan007]

Originally posted by ziploc
Answers:

1. One is "L" lens the other is nornal lens, of course the price different.
2. Why would zooming give you better pic? Low budget, get the cheaper lens lor. 3rd party lenses are even cheaper.

Oops! Juz found this article on "L" Lens - http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/lseries.html
So for the trouble. The second lens can zoom further but aperature is smaller. Can I still blur the background and make the subject stand out in the foreground?

 

[franciskc]

for me i will go for the 'L' lens with a 2x TC will give u a 140-400mm range with f/5.6

 

[megaweb]

Originally posted by franciskc
for me i will go for the 'L' lens with a 2x TC will give u a 140-400mm range with f/5.6

then ? what are u waiting for ? :devil:

 

[franciskc]

waiting for $$$$ to drop from teh sky:bwhat:

 

[StreetShooter]

By the way, last I checked the price of the 70-200 f2.8L USM (non-IS) was $2450, not $3000.

 

[makan007]

Originally posted by StreetShooter
By the way, last I checked the price of the 70-200 f2.8L USM (non-IS) was $2450, not $3000.

No money for that also.

 

[makan007]

Originally posted by franciskc
waiting for $$$$ to drop from teh sky:bwhat:

Go read today's Shin Min Daily News. A Feng Shui Master giving away money in KL.