Official Canon EOS 60D User Thread Part II
- Thread starter jamesaw
- Start date
konstrain
Member
hehe one easy way is to stop coming to clubsnap plus any other photography sites for a while.
just go shooting with your current setup.. then see if you're still reminded of 70-200..
if you constantly think you need 70-200, then maybe rent one for a day see if you still like it?
for me, all i did to stop the virus is to stop going to the classifieds section, the site reviews on the things i wanna get (but dun really need it yet).
just go shooting with your current setup.. then see if you're still reminded of 70-200..
if you constantly think you need 70-200, then maybe rent one for a day see if you still like it?
for me, all i did to stop the virus is to stop going to the classifieds section, the site reviews on the things i wanna get (but dun really need it yet).
SilentSeth
New Member
Bro. Rent before 24-70. Super heavy. Dat y I bought 17-55. Also the wide angle range I need too. Plus the is is good!
Yea I tried that before.. The weight & diameter is simply too much for my skinny arm.
Still prefer Sigma's 50-150 f2.8 (tho without OS/IS), nice zoom range on crop body and only as "heavy" as.. 780 grams.
Last edited:
Kongfu
New Member
I am telling myself 18-135 to cover the long range.
No money for 70-200 f2.8IS.
If get 70-200 F4 IS also itch.
But both lens damn heavy. Much heavier than 24-70...
Pls slap me.
Lol bro but the f4 weigh less than 800gm le....much much lighter than the f2.8 so to me its still ok since our 17-55 is only 100gm lighter
Kongfu
New Member
ya the 2.8 super heavy and will definitely not under my list lol
The 70-200 F2.8 is superb BUT it is kinda overweight on a 60D body BUT then again you can add on a grip to balance the weight better.
I just rented the 70-200 F2.8 to shoot my daughter's year end playschool performance....stunning quality but it is a struggle with the weight as it off balance and caused my wrist to hurt at the end of the day!
DO NOT ASSUME YOU NEED IT...TRY 1st! Rental is cheap as compared to the 1000s that you need to pay for the real one. Tame your desire....
I just rented the 70-200 F2.8 to shoot my daughter's year end playschool performance....stunning quality but it is a struggle with the weight as it off balance and caused my wrist to hurt at the end of the day!
DO NOT ASSUME YOU NEED IT...TRY 1st! Rental is cheap as compared to the 1000s that you need to pay for the real one. Tame your desire....
Kongfu
New Member
I actually prefer the range the 300version is giving.
it's f5.6 at the long end, too slow for my usage.
if you wanna shoot at 300mm only, it's better to get the 300L IS.
Kongfu
New Member
Bro,
Can share besides portait, wat do you normally shoot with your 70-200? for eg., wud a 70-200 be enuf to shoot the animals in our zoo close up?
i use my 70-200L mostly for portraits and i feel that it's especially good for kids. These toddlers are smaller in size than us adults which means i can go in nearer and or zoom in more, to fill them into the frame. even in indoor situation, the 70-200L is still very much useable.
other than that, i use it for street photography as i'm not a wide angle shooter on the streets. i don't dare to go near to my subjects which is why i snipe from afar, haha.
70-200L is generally not sufficient if you wanna take photos of animals, even in our Singapore Zoo. a 70-300 will do better in terms of reach, 100-400L if you can get your hands on it.
Kongfu
New Member
Hi Bro,
Thanks for sharing! I tot so too that 70-200 wont be enuf for zoo that's why am only looking at 70-300 either L or no L ...must save up for my next lens liao lol
Hi Bro,
Thanks for sharing! I tot so too that 70-200 wont be enuf for zoo that's why am only looking at 70-300 either L or no L ...must save up for my next lens liao lol
maybe you'll wanna review the frequency of using the lens, if it's one or two times, you can rent it.
don't need to plonk down the money just for the occasional zoo trips.
Kongfu
New Member
ya understand wat you mean...just like Rhema bro selling his 70-200 cos of under usage... but i'm that kind who wud rather keep the lens for even that low use rather than to get/find 1 when in need and will totally forget about cost lol
But for you suggestion, i'll weigh their price difference when i'm about to get it....thx
ya understand wat you mean...just like Rhema bro selling his 70-200 cos of under usage... but i'm that kind who wud rather keep the lens for even that low use rather than to get/find 1 when in need and will totally forget about cost lol
But for you suggestion, i'll weigh their price difference when i'm about to get it....thx
if you don't mind, can get the Tamron 70-300 VC USD.
i used the lens before and was quite surprised by its performance. for $700~, i say it's well worth it.
plus if you don't use it frequently, you won't feel the pain if you see it sits in the dry cabinet for extended period of time.
Kongfu
New Member
Is the IQ better than the canon non L version? cos the non L is selling at couple hundred higher and if so i rather get canon
Is the IQ better than the canon non L version? cos the non L is selling at couple hundred higher and if so i rather get canon
i never had any experience with the 70-300 non-L, so i can't give you an informed comparison.
but for me, i will either buy the L-version or the Tamron.
why? some reasons for you to consider, against the Tamron that is:
1) micro-USM vs USD(ultrasonic silent drive)
2) no full-time manual focus
3) rotating front element
yeah, 2 and 3 are mostly not needed by consumers but the thought of the Tamron having all the features at a lower price than the Canon, just puts the latter in the 'overpriced' spot light, especially when the 70-300 IS USM is a non-L.
Kongfu
New Member
Does make sense but 1st...I nid to knock myself up to b able to accept 3rd party...will definitely take a good look at it....thanks
Similar threads
