zoom lens thread? at DVinfo.net

Brian Luce · August 8th, 2009, 10:14 PM

Seems most people use primes on the mk II, I'm from the baby zoomer generation and just prefer the convenience of zooming. What are the hot picks? I hear the 70-200L f4 bantied about. B&H has a grey market version for $600. Canon | 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens | 2578A002 | B&H

Tom Roper · August 8th, 2009, 10:38 PM

The 70-200L f/4.0 is a sharp lens, but don't you want image stabilization? The IS version makes hand-holding a lot easier.

But the main reason for the primes isn't generational, it's because they have the speed for depth of field control.

Brian Luce · August 8th, 2009, 10:47 PM

I haven't had stabilizers in years, I think my TRV900 had it. Is there something unique to huge cmos chips that make it necessary? This camera, in video mode, doesn't seem suited to hand held.

Tom Roper · August 8th, 2009, 11:15 PM

I think it helps. It hand holds pretty well for me with the 70-200L f/4.0 IS.

Not saying you can't make it work with a smooth steady tripod. Without a doubt, you can. I've had the non-IS version of the 70-200 f/4.0 as well, and it was excellent optically. But with IS, you do open up some hand held possibilities, that's all.

Dan Chung · August 9th, 2009, 12:00 AM

Brian,

Just wanted to second what Tom said, the 70-200 f4L IS is a gem and the image stabilisation really works well. I've had both versions too and I'd recommend the IS one if you can run to it.

Dan

Alex Chong · August 9th, 2009, 12:38 AM

I started straight with the 70-200 f4 IS and it is the sharpest of all my lens. Beats my 24-105 4L out right. Get this lens, its a very good lens.

Brian Luce · August 9th, 2009, 01:13 AM

Do I have the math right? IS on the 70-200mm doubles the price from about $600 to $1200?

Chad Dyle · August 9th, 2009, 07:54 AM

I have the Tamron 70-200 2.8 and used it to shoot a wedding on the beach yesterday. I'm on vacation, but couldn't pass it up. Turns out that the couple work where where I live, but they live in my hometown. Small world.
Anyway, this was the first video I've really shot with the Tamron and it was a little shaky. My friend has the Canon version and I plan on borrowing it soon. I didn't know if the vibration reduction only worked with photo or both. I'll give my review after I use it.

Dan Chung · August 9th, 2009, 10:21 AM

Brian,

The price is double for the IS lens but they improved it a lot from the non-IS version. I now prefer to use the 70-200 f4L IS to the bigger f2.8 Canon zooms for sharpness and lightness, the IS really makes an f4 lens usable for stills. For video the IS does help a lot if you plan to handhold or shoulder mount a lot, for tripod only I doubt you would see any difference between IS and non IS. The new IS lens also has weather sealing on the lens mount.

Dan

Bill Grant · August 9th, 2009, 04:31 PM

I have just gotten a 17-35L 2.8 I can verify that it makes a big difference over the 50mm 1.4 that I was using. I shot the whole reception with it, and it kicked much arse. The distortion at 17 is very pronounced, but still a very cool lens.
Bill

Peter Berg · August 11th, 2009, 06:26 AM

I went straight for the 70-200/2.8 IS. Sure it's a massive price jump, but gives me versatility. I can handhold in movie mode indoors near a window with no probs. Also gives me great options for stills. All depends on what type of shooting you're doing.
cheers

Craig Linssen · August 11th, 2009, 03:03 PM

+1 for the 70-200 F/2.8 IS. GREAT lens and my copy is very sharp even wide open. My 135 F/2.0 just sits since I got the zoom. :-(

I also have the 16-35 F/2.8 which I am very happy with as well.

August 8th, 2009, 10:14 PM	#1
Brian Luce Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,290	zoom lens thread? Seems most people use primes on the mk II, I'm from the baby zoomer generation and just prefer the convenience of zooming. What are the hot picks? I hear the 70-200L f4 bantied about. B&H has a grey market version for $600. Canon \| 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens \| 2578A002 \| B&H

August 9th, 2009, 07:54 AM	#8
Chad Dyle Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 410	I have the Tamron 70-200 2.8 and used it to shoot a wedding on the beach yesterday. I'm on vacation, but couldn't pass it up. Turns out that the couple work where where I live, but they live in my hometown. Small world. Anyway, this was the first video I've really shot with the Tamron and it was a little shaky. My friend has the Canon version and I plan on borrowing it soon. I didn't know if the vibration reduction only worked with photo or both. I'll give my review after I use it. __________________ www.chaddyle.com www.chaddyleproductions.com

August 9th, 2009, 04:31 PM	#10
Bill Grant Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Columbia,SC Posts: 806	I have just gotten a 17-35L 2.8 I can verify that it makes a big difference over the 50mm 1.4 that I was using. I shot the whole reception with it, and it kicked much arse. The distortion at 17 is very pronounced, but still a very cool lens. Bill __________________ Cinema Couture www.cinemacouture.com

August 11th, 2009, 06:26 AM	#11
Peter Berg Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 31	I went straight for the 70-200/2.8 IS. Sure it's a massive price jump, but gives me versatility. I can handhold in movie mode indoors near a window with no probs. Also gives me great options for stills. All depends on what type of shooting you're doing. cheers __________________ ------- peter berg

August 8th, 2009, 10:38 PM	#2
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	The 70-200L f/4.0 is a sharp lens, but don't you want image stabilization? The IS version makes hand-holding a lot easier. But the main reason for the primes isn't generational, it's because they have the speed for depth of field control.

August 8th, 2009, 10:47 PM	#3
Brian Luce Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,290	I haven't had stabilizers in years, I think my TRV900 had it. Is there something unique to huge cmos chips that make it necessary? This camera, in video mode, doesn't seem suited to hand held.

August 8th, 2009, 11:15 PM	#4
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	I think it helps. It hand holds pretty well for me with the 70-200L f/4.0 IS. Not saying you can't make it work with a smooth steady tripod. Without a doubt, you can. I've had the non-IS version of the 70-200 f/4.0 as well, and it was excellent optically. But with IS, you do open up some hand held possibilities, that's all.

August 9th, 2009, 12:00 AM	#5
Dan Chung Major Player Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Beijing Posts: 665	Brian, Just wanted to second what Tom said, the 70-200 f4L IS is a gem and the image stabilisation really works well. I've had both versions too and I'd recommend the IS one if you can run to it. Dan

August 9th, 2009, 12:38 AM	#6
Alex Chong Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Brunei Posts: 140	I started straight with the 70-200 f4 IS and it is the sharpest of all my lens. Beats my 24-105 4L out right. Get this lens, its a very good lens.

August 9th, 2009, 01:13 AM	#7
Brian Luce Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,290	Do I have the math right? IS on the 70-200mm doubles the price from about $600 to $1200?

August 9th, 2009, 10:21 AM	#9
Dan Chung Major Player Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Beijing Posts: 665	Brian, The price is double for the IS lens but they improved it a lot from the non-IS version. I now prefer to use the 70-200 f4L IS to the bigger f2.8 Canon zooms for sharpness and lightness, the IS really makes an f4 lens usable for stills. For video the IS does help a lot if you plan to handhold or shoulder mount a lot, for tripod only I doubt you would see any difference between IS and non IS. The new IS lens also has weather sealing on the lens mount. Dan

August 11th, 2009, 03:03 PM	#12
Craig Linssen Tourist Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2	+1 for the 70-200 F/2.8 IS. GREAT lens and my copy is very sharp even wide open. My 135 F/2.0 just sits since I got the zoom. :-( I also have the 16-35 F/2.8 which I am very happy with as well.