Which lens to buy.

LeoB

In a bit of a quandry!! Whats new 2 questions and bit of advice needed.
Previous advice here a while ago said it was best to invest in glass, I and someone else were going to buy Eos 40d but now I am thinking of buying a 70-200 f2.8 lens. But I also see canon with an f 4 version which is quite a bit cheaper. I like shooting sports mainly G.A.A. club games. Seeing as its coming into winter less light ect, which should I go for. What is the sigma version like?
IF or When I get the lens what would be the best setting to use on my camera, Eos 400d.

Also see a 4 gig C/F card Purdys for £29stg. Its San Disk Ultra 2. Are these good cards? Thanks in advance

whyulittle

Sandisk Extreme III cards from MyMemory for £20.99.

I would (and did) go with the f/2.8 version. Better off to pay the little bit extra than to waste money on the f/4 when you already know it's probably not going to suffice.

Biro

Sandisk are probably the best out there, and go for the 2.8. With the weather we're having this year, you'll need all the help you can get! I have the IS version of the 2.8. I've no idea what the Sigma is like, but I have read good reviews about it. It didn't come out quite as good as the Canon, but still - it's a good bit cheaper! And how big a difference can there really be?

Tactical

Go with the best glass and as fast as you can afford.

Ideally the f2.8 all the way...

You needn't worry too much about IS with the f2.8 and if you do want a little extra stability then consider a monopod perhaps?

squareballoon

I have the 70-200 2.8 for my 400d and I find it excellent.

Tactical

In relation to your question on which settings to use, this is an impossible question to answer as it will entirely depend on the situation.

Ideally you want the settings that give you the best result for what you're shooting.

For sports this may be a wide apeture and a fast shutter speed with the ISO set to give an acceptable shutter time to freeze action if this is your intent, or you may want a longer shutter time for a panning shot. It really depends on a vast array of factors.

The best advice is to get out and practice. Learn what the effects of each parameter are and how they interact.

You could start off with a semi-auto mode like Av or Tv and take one shot on fully auto (which is available on the camera you have specified) and then on one of the semi-auto modes and when confident enough on fully manual. Compare the results between the full auto shot and the one where you have made some or all of the decisions and see if you are happy with the shots. You can examine the exif data on most editing packages so you'll be able to compare the parameters of each shot.

Hope this is a little helpful and I'm sure there aer others here who'll be much better able to advise you.

BoardsRanger

Am also interested in this lens, but cant decide whether i need the IS version or not. my hands would'nt be the steadiest. is there a noticeable difference between the IS and non-IS?

Biro

BoardsRanger wrote: »

Am also interested in this lens, but cant decide whether i need the IS version or not. my hands would'nt be the steadiest. is there a noticeable difference between the IS and non-IS?

I like the IS. At 200mm it does help! And if you use an extender, you're increasing the focal length by 1.4x or 2.0x. Then you'll need it even more! It has two settings, the second one is designed for panning shots.

Tactical

On the Canon.ie website there i no 70 - 200mm f2.8 I lens, its a non-IS only.

IS has its uses but there are certain situations where th IS cn introduce problems especially if using a tripod or panning. There is a tendancy for the IS to oscillate when using tripod.

Biro

Tactical wrote: »

On the Canon.ie website there i no 70 - 200mm f2.8 I lens, its a non-IS only.

IS has its uses but there are certain situations where th IS cn introduce problems especially if using a tripod or panning. There is a tendancy for the IS to oscillate when using tripod.

True, but in the manual it does tell you to turn it off when using it on a tri-pod! The 70-200 f2.8 IS used be on the Canon.ie website.

5uspect

For shooting GAA/sports you shouldn't need IS because your shutter speed will be so high.
Unless you think you'll need to be shooting below 1/200 without a tripod or monopod then the IS is worth it.

feileacan

Tactical wrote: »

On the Canon.ie website there i no 70 - 200mm f2.8 I lens, its a non-IS only.
.

i have a 70-200 f2.8, guarantee its IS

go for the f2.8, its a lush lens and worth spending the mula on.

Tactical

Not doubting there is a 70 - 200mm f2.8 IS lens, was just saying its not listed on the Canon.ie site.

5uspect

it is:
http://www.canon.ie/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Image_Stabilization_Lenses/EF70_200mm_f2.8L_IS_USM/index.asp

LeoB

Thanks for the replies, Im vey grateful. Will be going for the Sigma version.:) Scarey the difference in price.:p

MartMax

i have the 70-200 f4 IS L. it produces good and sharp photos, however in low light situation it struggles. so the f2.8 is a better choice but it's heavier and bigger.

5uspect

It is indeed very, very heavy.

stephend1938

BoardsRanger wrote: »

Am also interested in this lens, but cant decide whether i need the IS version or not. my hands would'nt be the steadiest. is there a noticeable difference between the IS and non-IS?

I went for the 70-200mm f4 IS L, the difference of the price of the 2.8 allowed me to get the 24-105 f4 L IS later. I use a full frame Canon 5D. This gives coverage of most images. I agree the 'bokeh' is better with wide aperture so I got an 'ordinary' 85 1.8 lens for people images.

challengemaster

IMO, IS =