Another Canon Lens Question

vectra

I asked a couple of people this recently but am about to order within the next week or two,
I still haven't made my mind up.
One person suggested the sigma 150-600 but while I am buying, I may as well go for the best I can afford. ( I may not get a second chance once the missus sees the price )

Anyhow.
I have decided on a Canon 6D ( Mk2 if it is within reach ) with the 24-105 F4 (11) Lens

I also want a Telephoto lens. ( Don't ask, as I won't be using it in any particular area.
I just like long reach and great quality, with some backround blur.

Toss up between the
70-200 F2.8 is2

Or

100-400 Mk2

Both are basically the same price.

Which one should I buy and why?
Also
I will be buying from Eglobal

Paypal or Credit card?

Insured shipping is a no brainer I guess?

Thanks

wersal gummage

I presume you know that these are considered professional quality lenses and would be bought by people with specific purposes in mind ? It's an awful lot of money to spend when you're not even sure what you'd want it for. Obviously if you've the money and want the very best that is fine.

Have you tried out the 700-200f2.8 is? Or the 100-400mkii? They are very big lenses and weigh quite a bit. Most people wouldn't just wander around with them and they are the opposite of discreet. Is there a reason you would want the image stabilization or even f2.8? Is it just a case of that is the most expensive version and therefore the best and hence the one you want? As an alternative, the 70-200f4 weighs very little, is very cheap in comparison and as a result you might end up carrying it around and using it more often? For a person who needs the 70-200f2.8is, this lense would not cut it, but if you won't know what you want the lense for it might be ok...

I think the 6d mk ii is not available for a while yet

vectra

wersal gummage wrote: »

I presume you know that these are considered professional quality lenses and would be bought by people with specific purposes in mind ? It's an awful lot of money to spend when you're not even sure what you'd want it for. Obviously if you've the money and want the very best that is fine.

Have you tried out the 700-200f2.8 is? Or the 100-400mkii? They are very big lenses and weigh quite a bit. Most people wouldn't just wander around with them and they are the opposite of discreet. Is there a reason you would want the image stabilization or even f2.8? Is it just a case of that is the most expensive version and therefore the best and hence the one you want? As an alternative, the 70-200f4 weighs very little, is very cheap in comparison and as a result you might end up carrying it around and using it more often? For a person who needs the 70-200f2.8is, this lense would not cut it, but if you won't know what you want the lense for it might be ok...

I think the 6d mk ii is not available for a while yet

Hi,
I understand where you are coming from and appreciate your thoughts.

Let me try to explain as simple as possible
First off my son has a 6d with the 24-105 is lens
He also has the 70-200 F2.8 is11 Lens
Both give fantastice results.

I had a Nikon D300 with the kit 18-200 lens.
I sold off this lens and bought the much praised Nikkor 17-55 f2.8.
I was still dissapointed with the results. ( Totally my own fault as I was apparently not able to hold the camera steady enough. ( Hence wanting the is or is 11 on the canon lenses )
My son used this camera and lens for me as a test and took must steadier shots than I could do.

Thinking about uses.
I would probably mainly use the telephoto for Plane photography.
I also live right next to a Rugby pitch and thought it would be decent for taking some practice shots in there as well?

I would also use this for a bit of wildlife photography as there is quiet a lot of it at a local Irver in my town.
So.
I know the clarity the 70-200 give after viewing my sons ( and other owners shots )

But maybe I should go for the extra reach with the 100-400. ?
This way we could swap around lenses between us if needs be?

I have a budget set aside which covers whichever lens I choose.

Also would not be lugging them around a whole lot as I would be driving to most destinations.

Thanks again

wersal gummage

I'm no expert at all, but a few things that occur to me.

You understand full frame v a cropped sensor camera? Your son has the 6d so I guess you are used to this. For extra reach, the Canon 7d mk ii might also be worth a look. You lose the full frame and apparently some quality with that, but I'd guess it the difference is not really noticeable for amateurs or viewing on a laptops or iPad etc.

I think that image stabilization only works with still subjects. So it will help you use a slower shutter speed when taking a photo in poor light for example, but to the best of my knowledge is of no assistance whatsoever with moving objects (eg wildlife or sports). If you are not holding the camera steady enough, you might need a faster shutter speed. Also, will it be harder for you to hold steady with a very heavy lense? I guess you could use a monopod for sports /wildlife?

I think for wildlife and airplanes, personally I would go with the 100-400, but that is what, f5. 6? May not be great for rugby on a dark evening.

vectra

Yes,
I understand full frame and cropped.
Main reasons for choosing the 6d :

1)
Photo quality is fantastic ( To my eye anyhow )
2)
tThe 6d is supposed to work exceptional in low light conditions..

I get your points and are all valid and appreciated.
This is exactly where I am stumped.

I have my mind set on the 6d with the 24-105. ( I have used my sons one and was very happy with the photos I achieved with this.

My big thing now is choice between both lenses.

vectra

wersal gummage wrote: »

As an alternative, the 70-200f4 weighs very little, is very cheap in comparison and as a result you might end up carrying it around and using it more often? For a person who needs the 70-200f2.8is, this lense would not cut it, but if you won't know what you want the lense for it might be ok...

You know what.
Loking at it and reading some reviews, apparently the 70-200 F4 gives every bit as good IQ as the F2.8
Maybe this might be a more sensible option.

Any other options?
The Sigma 150-600 ??
The other thing is.
This will probably be a once off purchase as it is our 30th wedding anniversary this August and we have put a bit of a limit on budget each.
So with the gear above and a new phone, I will hit my limit.
I can only imagine this will be a one off chance also
So might as well get the best possible within that budget.
Thanks

Wailin

wersal gummage wrote: »

.

I think that image stabilization only works with still subjects. So it will help you use a slower shutter speed when taking a photo in poor light for example, but to the best of my knowledge is of no assistance whatsoever with moving objects (eg wildlife or sports). If you are not holding the camera steady enough, you might need a faster shutter speed. Also, will it be harder for you to hold steady with a very heavy lense? I guess you could use a monopod for sports /wildlife?
.

On the 70-200 f2.8 mkii there are two IS settings. One is for still subjects but the second one is for following a subject in a horizontal motion. So can be used for following a bird say or a moving person in a horizontal direction. Works very well. Great lens.

uck51js9zml2yt

I've a tamron 150-600 on a 600D.
I don't use it often but its a nice addition.I'm finding I take it out a bit more often but my goto is a tamron 18-200
Got the 600mm from eglobal in late 2015 for 750e.

If you look for keps on the photo thread a lot of his shots are with the tamron 600mm

vectra

Looks like the 6d Mk2 wil be available soon.

PRE-ORDER

ESTIMATED SHIPPING DATE: 27/07/2017

Canon Irelland

vectra

Update.
I have purchased the 6D / 24-105 f4.
I have decided on the 70-200 f2.8
But at 1500 euro on Rglobal,,I am thinking will I used it enough to justify the cost.
This can be got on eglobal for around 960 euro
Would it be worth the extra to buy the canon?
Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Thanks

uck51js9zml2yt

vectra wrote: »

Update.
I have purchased the 6D / 24-105 f4.
I have decided on the 70-200 f2.8
But at 1500 euro on Rglobal,,I am thinking will I used it enough to justify the cost.
This can be got on eglobal for around 960 euro
Would it be worth the extra to buy the canon?
Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Thanks

I have several tamron/ sigma lenses and I've no complaints.
I can't see why you would want to pay more for the same thing!

vectra

Samara Crooked Milk wrote: »

I have several tamron/ sigma lenses and I've no complaints.
I can't see why you would want to pay more for the same thing!

Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
Yes, I am thinking the same, I have done some reading up on this particular Tamron and it is getting great reviews.
I was only thinking Build quality as image quality seems almost identical from both.

Wailin

vectra wrote: »

Would it be worth the extra to buy the canon?
Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Thanks

Definitely. The canon 70-200 mm mkii is streets ahead of the tamron regarding build quality and weather sealing. Plus it's much sharper wide open and far better bokeh if that's your thing. Probably not too noticeable unless printing large mind you. In my opinion (and plenty of others) it is one of canons best lens you can get.