Which Lens Should I get

[wesleytan12345]

Hi everybody, hope you guys are having a great day! :bsmilie: I hope perhaps some of you guys are able to give your opinions on this issue Im currently facing!
Currently, I'm thinking of upgrading and getting a new lens, the Canon 70-200mm L f/4 USM Lens.

However, Im faced with the decision about getting either the 70-200mm L f/4 USM (RRP $1049) lens or the 70-200mm L f/4 IS USM Lens (With Image Stabilization) (which the RRP is ~$1,900)
I am also deciding whether to get it 2nd hand or buy a brand new one (about $500 difference if I buy 2nd hand). AS Im still currently studying,I have limited savings to spend on lenses, so any savings i can make would be tremendously helpful.
So, the main issue I'm now facing is
1) Is the Image Stabilization is really worth the additional money ( ~$500-800 price difference) and
2) Should I get it 2nd hand so as to save money?

I tend to do a lot of landscape photography and action ( Eg. Sports competitions)
All replies are welcome and greatly appreciated. If there is a need for me to clarify something please do feel free to post your questions for me.
Thanks! :sweat:

 

[macVince]

You might want to consider the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM instead. It's less than $400. Advantages include very sharp pictures & nice colours; greater range than 70-200; has IS; STM allows AF when videoing (with EOS 650 & later models); much lighter; 3rd party hood is inexpensive; and more.

You could also watch this review by Chris Frost on YouTube: http://youtu.be/N5wZAvUmPUA

I have some photos taken with this lens on my Flickr site, in my 70D review and in my APAW thread here in Clubsnap if you like. I've been using this lens for a while; it's very good. dde03

 

[daredevil123]

1) Is the Image Stabilization is really worth the additional money ( ~$500-800 price difference)

Yes it is. But if you are going to be using it in good sunny conditions IS matters a lot less. If you are shooting sports, you will need fast shutter speed anyways, IS will matter less. If you are shooting landscapes, IS is completely useless. So you really need to be clear on how you will use the lens.

2) Should I get it 2nd hand so as to save money?

If you are tight on budget, you should be looking at 2nd hand options. But that is a personal decision that you have to work out yourself. And for the money you were thinking of spending for a new 70-200/4 IS, you can get a 2nd hand 70-200/2.8 IS. Which is a much better and more versatile lens, that will grow with you in your photography journey. But again, you have that make that personal decision on what you really need.

There are many alternatives as well, the Sigma 70-200/2.8 OS. the Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC. both giving excellent optics for much less money. You might want to consider them if you are tight on cash. There are pros and cons between getting a F4 lens vs a F2.8 lens. If you are doing sports, and especially indoors, F4 might not give you enough light to get the shutter speeds you would like to freeze action. I highly recommend F2.8. But in the end it really comes down to you balancing between your needs and your budget.

 

[SilverPine]

Currently I own both the 70-200mm f/4 L and IS L, both I purchase from ClubSnap B & S. Beside the price and the IS, they are not build equally, the IS version is sharper please refer to the following link:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens Image Quality


For 2nd hand lens: non IS version is around $600-700, IS version is about $900-1000, the price different is about $300. I purchased almost all my lens in Clubsnap, you need to check the lens carefully just before the purchase, this apply to new lens also. I just take the price discount for 2nd hand lens as a form of warranty.

Both lens are very fast for sport event.

 

[Turbonetics]

Hi everybody, hope you guys are having a great day! :bsmilie: I hope perhaps some of you guys are able to give your opinions on this issue Im currently facing!
Currently, I'm thinking of upgrading and getting a new lens, the Canon 70-200mm L f/4 USM Lens.

However, Im faced with the decision about getting either the 70-200mm L f/4 USM (RRP $1049) lens or the 70-200mm L f/4 IS USM Lens (With Image Stabilization) (which the RRP is ~$1,900)
I am also deciding whether to get it 2nd hand or buy a brand new one (about $500 difference if I buy 2nd hand). AS Im still currently studying,I have limited savings to spend on lenses, so any savings i can make would be tremendously helpful.
So, the main issue I'm now facing is
1) Is the Image Stabilization is really worth the additional money ( ~$500-800 price difference) and
2) Should I get it 2nd hand so as to save money?

I tend to do a lot of landscape photography and action ( Eg. Sports competitions)
All replies are welcome and greatly appreciated. If there is a need for me to clarify something please do feel free to post your questions for me.
Thanks! :sweat:

I would recommend with IS option because IS helps in tele range.
the IS comes in 2 modes. first is normal stationary shot and the second is panning IS which is good if your are tracking a subject.
But if u don't mind listening further to my advise,I will highly recommend u the 70-200mm F2.8 IS II.
This is the best lens in this range and u will not look back. Many people find that F4 is not enough and got the F2.8 later on. U can consider a used copy though to save some cost.

 

[SkyStrike]

Actually, it can be hard to nail down what you will want...

Depending on the type of sports, the choice might be different... e.g. When shooting Indoors, the lighting is generally bad for sports. Under this scenario, you will want to be looking at f2.8 lenses as there is little light to work with already. But for 70-200 f2.8, they are heavy.. not exactly very practical for bringing around for landscapes, thou you can.

Then on the other hand when shooting outdoors, if you will only be shooting those outdoor sports in bright daylight, I think f4 will do. The sunlight does wonder to shutter speed.

So, you will have to find a balance for yourself to see which is more of the priority to you. There are loads of considerations like Cost, Focusing Speed, Max Aperture, Reach (sometimes 70-200 is not enough for sports)

 

[wesleytan12345]

Hi everyone! Thanks so much for taking the time to reply! Really appreciate it!
From what I've gathered: the 70-200mm f/2.8L II USM seems to be the 'best of the 70-200mm series and one of the best telephoto zoom lenses. I'll probably start saving for it now and perhaps get one during or after NS :bsmilie:

I've also received feedback that IS is definitely required esp for shots that are indoors/ low on light. For this, I will be opting for IS lenses over non-IS lenses. (Also partly my hand no strength to tahan lens weight (even despite the fact IS lenses are heavier HAHA ;p ).

Hence my options are getting 2nd hand lenses but i dont know which to choose.
1) Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Lens ( Constant Apeture, but lower range)
OR
2) Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM Lenss ( Better Range, but the aperture is crazy , and further more i think this lens has the weird zoom ring nearer to front of lens and focus ring nearer to body of lens? )

Based on your opinions and experience, which would be the better option?

 

[DSolZ]

if it is just 1 or 2 ... I will go for (1)
anyway if you are going second hand .. no harm getting either one to try ... if don't like sell it off.. shouldn't lose money.