I appreciate everyone's input on my question.

Actually I was thinking of getting a used Sigma when I posted this. So if there are any Sigma lens users out there, your input would be great.

And Travis, I just read the latest EventDV article. Thank you for choosing Miami instead of San Diego. You would have killed all the business here for everyone else.

If you do go with the 135, you can also get the 1.4 teleconverter.

i did ALOT of looking into which 70-200 to buy

between:

sigma

Tamron

Canon (2.8 IS, 2.8 non IS, f4 IS, f4 non IS)

decided right away the f4 canons as low light is my main priority.

Neither the tamron or the sigma have IS

the canon was too expensive, and general consensus between the sigma and the tamron was that the tamron was the better of the 2 (both pretty much the same price, at least they were when I was buying last year)


So i bought the tamron, thinking that IS wouldnt be too much of an issue as most of my shooting is on tripod or monopod.

After about 6 months of shooting with the tamron, I;ve came to the conclusion that even on a tripod, IS does a whole lotta work for you.


With the Tamron, even on sticks and especially at the 200mm end, if you breath near the camera, you will get judder, jello, motion, shaky (pick your term)

Now I still think its good for the money, but I kinda wish I'd saved up and got the canon 2,8 WITH IS (or maybe even the f4 with IS, but I often shoot with the tamron wide open at 2.8 (almost every wedding for the speeches I've got the Tamron 70-200 on my 7d, and the canon 17-55 on my 550d.

So I'd say if you afford to save up a but, get the Canon with IS, but I think the IS is a really underestimated element with the long lenses.

My 2 pence

James

That is so true. When you're long, unless you're on a concrete floor, you will get some visible shake when anyone moves anywhere near the camera/

The Sigma have released the OS (Optical Stabilizer) version priced around $1300.. I haven't try it yet but seems promising.

I used to have Canon f4L and I agree, when someone walks near the tripod the shake is quite visible especially at the long end

Sigma isn't horrible glass, but it's also not L-series Canon glass either. My thought was two-fold when we purchased our 70-200's. First, lenses are like an investment .. sort of. Buy a great lens and unless you drop it in a lake it's going to last a long time. The second thing was that the Sigma focus rings spin the opposite of Canon's, and that can really mess you up in the heat of the moment. So I stuck with Canon.

I'm starting to get bored in Miami ... d;-p

Not as much now since I got a 135 2.0.

I own 85mm, 135mm, 70-200 f4 and 70-200 f2.8is

During ceremony, when it is a big church, we use both 70-200 so we can stand as far as we can with our 5ds.

If its relatively small space, i would pick 135 for my monopod and 70-200 on tripod.

If i need to choose between the 3, i would choose 70-200.

135 is too gorgeous to be missed though....

Is there much of a difference between an older 70-200mm and the new version? The new version is $2,400 but a used lens can go for $1,500. Which would you buy?

"Hail to the king" plays in the background...

If you're shooting more with the 135, that means you're shooting more without IS. For certain, my camera work sucks without IS ...then again, I'm not you. :)

I've heard that there is a great difference. I haven't try it yet, but my housemate is buying one from overseas and soon I'll be trying (and borrowing) his lens for my next wedding :P .. If have the budget, I would buy the Mkii version.. Always rely on the latest technology!

Funny enough, I just realized that I don't have a single lens with IS. But the comments here are most enlightening. Maybe next purchase.

I used to love the 70-200 during bridal preps, but it proved too heavy. The 135 is perfect for this situation. Ceremony is still 70-200 for Cam B. My 135 is on Cam A.

You can still get fantastic results with the older.

For those with the APS-C-sized sensor cams (7D, 60D, T2i), a 70-200mm may not be very ideal for weddings where you'll have to be up in the action. The crop factor tightens up your shot tremendously for starters; I had to stand considerably far away from a large dance floor just to get some acceptable medium shots of people dancing. Unless you're standing at the back of a church for the ceremony, I can't see how you're getting "breathable" shots.

Also, it looks great and is easily recognizable by even the lay person as a professional lens, but it's very bulky and heavy. It's awkward to shoot with unless your stabilized in some way, even moreso for the smaller-sensor cams.

This lens was meant for the full-framers, and you'll have a much easier time if so.

That's part of the beauty of the lens. You don't have to be so close to people when you're filming them. When people don't know they are being filmed you get more authentic footage. We use 70-200's for every single wedding (not exclusively, of course).