I Bought A Big White Lens & You Should Too.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 มี.ค. 2024
- After years of "zooming with my feet" I finally bought a big white zoom lens. This is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L. I did not go with the RF version even though I use R cameras - The Canon EOS R8 & R5. In this video I discuss the reasons for this choice and compare examples of using this lens over the lenses that have been in my arsenal. I also explain why even though I love Sigma lenses I did not opt for a Sigma Art lens in this case.
Website(buy some swag!)
Fitzwater-Photography.com
Blog:
zippercityphotography.blogspot...
Analog Instagram:
/ fitzwateranalog
Photography IG:
/ fitzwaterphoto
Cycling TH-cam Channel:
/ @timfitzwater
Flickr - Images in Quality:
www.flickr.com/photos/timjayf...
![จีเหลี่ยมโคตรตึง!! - Skibidi Toilet 73 (part 2) [FANMADE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MBvD7tKeyPY/mqdefault.jpg)
I fortunately got a 70-200mm f2.8 iii on Marketplace for $900 and I was shocked the whole way back home after in person meet at how extremely clean the lenses is, now I don't have to worry about RF version in my mind with that extending tube mechanism anymore. I use for wildlife with R7 and crop is just insanely sharp. Best 70-200mm of all time.
Dang - that is a killer deal! I saw some cheaper but didn't trust the sellers. I have been using it constantly since. Even on a 80 mile bike ride to see the eclipse!
I, too, got the kit 24-105 with my R6m2 and fell in love. But it wasn't until I got my EF 70-200 m1 that I really started improving my photography skills.
The 24-105 is a very practical lens. I use it for tons of stuff and it is decent at everything. The 70-200 f/2.8 is a special lens. I think it looks better even at 200mm than the 24-105 ever does. Both will still almost always be with me when working though. I am literally seeing if I can back up enough to use the 70mm end of the long lens though instead of switching to the f/4
😂
70-200 my most used glass. Super versatile.
I do need to get wide fairly often / but when I don’t…..best lens!
Still an EF user and I use the Macro 24-105 for landscape and macro and a Sigma 150-600 for wildlife. Now you know my entire set up 😂
Nice! If I didn't wear out my 5DIV it would still; be a perfectly capable camera.
@@fitzwaterphotography9971 I may still be using the EOS Rebel I was gifted if film was cheaper and I didn't get into bird of prey.
I think you made the right choice with native Cannon. I shoot Nikon and bought the Tamron and its not really sharp at 2.8. I’ve often wondered if it would be sharper if I spent the few extra doll-hairs and got the Nikon 70-200. Dont get me wrong, its sharp enough for what I do. Its simply the OCD.
Ha! I know the good enough attitude. I do think it really is the undertone of this video- no client has ever complained about my photos - but I knew they could be better….so i finally made them better.
Just like if I got a 600mm prime rather than the Sigma 150-600mm but I also don't have the funds for 15k and I need a few focal lengths for what I do
I love that lens! I have the non IS version, as I used it when I bought it, for sports. I could swear that my EF 100-400L WITH IS works perfectly, mounted on my R6 MII with the adaptor, I can hear it. If I turn the switch on it off, the sound stops. Interesting.
I was using this today and I can fell the IS. Canon on Canons work flawlessly as intended with the adapter.
Interesting glass.... i use and have several smc f series glass from the pentax line. I shoot pentax so its an easy one for me. Cool video review.
I have only grown to love it even more - starting to feel like how did I live without it already.
I have Pentax film cameras and lenses but I have never used their modern cameras.
Thanks! Cheers!
@@fitzwaterphotography9971 should do an update and some photos to go with it. That would be 😎
I was so excited to get my first 70-200L.. got it from a pawn shop for 400.00..yeah..70-200L F4 with no IS... It was still a great deal and one of my first L lenses probably 5 years ago. surprisingly it was tack sharp on the 90D, but any camera shake omg it sucked at times with that 32mp sensor. I decided I wanted to invest in a version II with is and 2.8. That was the most expensive lens I had ever bought in my hobbyist shooting since 2008. After taxes it was right at 1500.00 a couple years ago. Was a mint lens with no scratches on it and little use. One of my best investments I think for a lens at the time, used it for portraits, wildlife, sons track meets it's just a great freaking lens to use and versatile. But somewhere in that time period I got a interest in wildlife photography and oh boy..what a rabbit hole that is!!! 70-200 did great at subjects up close but it shows it lack of mm pretty quick when out and about trying to shoot raptures and other birds like that. Got the EF 100-400L IS ver 1 and for its time period it was probably a good lens for the lower MP FF cameras and apsc but it did not work well with the 90D and eventually sold it and got the sigma 150-600C and it was a better combo for the 90D and gave me more mm for subjects but birds in flight was a struggle so invested in the R7, a decently great camera all around but got the FF bug and bought the R6MII which was so much better shooting with. Sold the Sigma and got 1 of 3 RF 200-800 that was available in my state the day after it was released to sell and I am pretty happy now with my setup and adding the 1.4 extender I'm up to 1120mm for wildlife. Photography is my main hobby and I don't spend money on much else so for me even as a hobbyist I make that my validation for overspending probably more than I should. I've looked at the RF 70-200's don't think I could ever justify the 2.8 version having an ef version that works great. Almost got a F4 used for 900.00, but again..why... for what you do I think it is a great investment for your business and you saved a lot of money going with the EF version, I still have a ton of EF glass even though the only EF body I have now is a 70D my daughter uses once in a while and it works great with the EF L glass I own and the lenses work great with the adapter for the RF, I thought I was the only person with 2 EF-RF adapters, good to know I am not hahaha. I do like doing video so the overheating of the R6 and R5 honestly was a turn off for me when they first came out and that has stuck in my brain on spending money on either of those bodies. It's nice to watch a video of someone that utilizes what they have and makes it work for them for their business and career, I admire that. I'm not much of a people person anymore so wanting to go pro with what I have doing weddings or portraits really has no interest for me, although I do like doing portraits of people. Liking your channel so far, hope it grows for you. Subbed.
Thanks! That is quite the camera lens journey! I shot and event all day yesterday and I can’t get over how good the 70-200 is. Editing my photos this morning and whether the client knows or not I can tell the huge jump this lens gives me. I won’t really ever need anything longer for what I do but I totally get why you have gone so long.
Oh - and the overheating thing was blown way out of proportion. One - they fixed a lot of it in firmware- but for the modes I shoot it has never shut down. No one who knows what they are doing shoots long clips in 4K at 120 and 8k is way too much memory for me to deal with. (Though Jared Polin says he shoots his show in 8k with no issues). I shoot these in 4K with no issues.
Cheers!
Good move! Every time I switched camera systems I would always get a 24 to 70 2.8
and a 70-200 2.8 or equivalent. I wish I knew you were in the market for one, I have one I don’t use, but it’s a series one and has a lot of marks on it. Works great though. One of the two sharpest lenses I’ve ever shot with.
So dumb I didn’t own one. Yours might have been fine for me - as long as the focus motors are fast enough for modern cameras. This is definitely what Canon has always been good at making although.
Also - I’m was trying to write that camera gear response but I wish you were out here tonight. Effing blackball Chris was here! I’ll get your way soon though. 😘
I decided on the Mark2 of this lens myself after owning the Sigma version. I couldn’t justify the upgrade on my R6. At some point I will upgrade if the need is truly there. I use mine for Sports and I shoot Soccer. I do like the fact that I don’t have to carry the adaptor with me and just slapping on the RF. I have a RF24-7. I did see the Sigma 105 f1.4 and was thinking I can put that on my R50 crop sensor for better low light in some places where stadium light is bad. Thoughts?
I have an old Sigma 70-200 2.8 with no IS that needs upgrading. I've had it for a decade, and the aperture randomly sticks, that said, it has been a very good lens image-wise. I've been contemplating getting the Canon EF version, but I don't like the white lenses because they make you stick out like a sore thumb, and at certain events people/security see you as a paparazzi. I might just keep it Sigma for my upgrade, and plus I'll be saving a truck load of cash. Tamron makes a good one that some of my Nikon friends use, and it is very tempting too…
I just got back from a day long gig and I am even more happy with my choice. I can't believe how good this lens is at 200mm. Shooting it with the IS at 160th. The white may stand out a bit - but at these sizes don't they all stand out? Depends on what you are doing I guess. One guy today did mention my lens. Tamrons have gotten better but I think I would still go for the Sigma as my third party choice.
I sold the same lens and adapter to help pay for a RF 100-500 F4.5-7.1 and glad I did. The EF 70-200 F2.8 is a very heavy lens to carry around. Just curious, the Canon RF 70-200 F4 is about the same price as what you paid, but shorter and much less in weight. Did you need the EF F2.8 for the wider aperture? I'm seriously considering the getting the RF 70-200 F4.
I need the 2.8 for a number of reasons. Low light event photography(I really notice when I switch back to my 24-104 f/4), getting the shallower depth for separation, and I feel the shallow depth also makes it a much better portrait lens as it has beautiful background blur. Personally for my work I would never buy an f/4 lens again.
Oh dear. The lenses are made to be durable, but it pains me every time you slap the most vulnerable parts in it right away lol. You dont need to beat it like that!
Ha! An L lens - it better be able to take a lot more than that!!
I do remember seeing the way the photographer I assisted for here handle his gear and I thought it was nuts. I still try to be a little careful but I am closer to him now.