Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is The Lens Of All Lenses?  
User currently offlineFlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5671 times:

Hi everyone,

I know a lot of the a.net photographers use the Canon 75-300 USM (IS). And then there is a huge amount of people using the Canon 70-200 L USM (IS). I would even say, almost all of the Canon Photographers here have either one of these lenses. The price difference between these two pieces of glass however is major. The 75-300 USM without the IS can be bought for about 200-250 Euros. The 70-200 L USM without IS can be bought as the f4 version for about 600 Euros, and the f2.8 version for a lot more than that. And then the IS version of the 70-200 L USM f2.8 is about 1500 - 1600 Euros. Another lens to talk about might be the 70-300 DO IS USM which is about 1100 - 1200 Euros. I was at a photo store in Stuttgart about 3 weeks ago and I tried out the 70-200 L, both with IS and without and I totally fell in love with it. Now I just wanting to ask the most knowledgeable group of aviation photographers which lens they thought everyone should own and why.

Cheers,
Sebastian


Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5650 times:

Quoting FlyingZacko (Thread starter):
What Is The Lens Of All Lenses?



mummy  drool   hyper 


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12460 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5645 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

If you're shooting Nikon, then the 70-200VR f/2.8 is the daddy.


Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 48
Reply 3, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5641 times:

"What Is The Lens Of All Lenses?"

In what sense? Quality? Range? Size? Price? # sold?

cheers,
Eduard


User currently offlineFlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5639 times:

Gary,

is that the Canon 1200mm that is supposed to be about 105,000 Euros (That's what www.canon.de says) ?

Scbriml,

that would be like the Canon 70-200 L USM IS f/2.8 then.
Sorry for not including any Nikon lenses, but I don't know anything about them.
Cheers,
Sebastian



Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineFlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5636 times:

Eduard,

what I meant, but didn't quite clearly express I guess, was which lens is worth its price the most? I mean, I am wondering whether or not it is worth spending the money on the Canon L series and alike. So pretty much I wanna know which lens produces the best quality versus its price.

Cheers,
Sebastian



Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 48
Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5632 times:

Quoting FlyingZacko (Reply 5):
So pretty much I wanna know which lens produces the best quality versus its price.

Hmm... that 1200 f5.6 doesn't make any sense then.  Smile
Eduard


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5629 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Best quality/price ratio is probably the 17-40 f/4.0L and 70-200 f/4.0L

Quoting FlyingZacko (Reply 5):
I mean, I am wondering whether or not it is worth spending the money on the Canon L series and alike

Without a doubt YES! Be careful though, L glass is addictive Wink

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5624 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 2):
If you're shooting Nikon, then the 70-200VR f/2.8 is the daddy.

The 200-400 f4 VR ain't half bad either *drool*



what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12460 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5611 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ChrisH (Reply 8):
The 200-400 f4 VR ain't half bad either *drool*

Yes, I somewhat covet that lens as well.  yummy 

However, at the price I don't think I could ever explain it to my wife or the bank manager. Then again, if I can just get the right six numbers on Saturday...  scratchchin 



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5606 times:

For the price, the 70-200 f/4 wins hands down.

User currently offlineJetTrader From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 586 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5596 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 10):
For the price, the 70-200 f/4 wins hands down.

I have to agree 100% with Eric (DLKAPA) - bank for your buck it has to be the Canon 70-200mm F4 L - I have one and it's a great little lens!  bigthumbsup 

Cheers,
Dean / JT



Life's dangerous. Get a f**king helmet!
User currently offlineLHRSIMON From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 1343 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5583 times:

I would go with the 70-200 L IS USM F/2.8

Pin sharp through the range , and very fast AF. Good in low light (indoor sports etc etc) due to the f/2.8. IS available for low shutter photo's panning etc etc. And superb build quality. Yes its expensive (appx £1200.00) but it can fill 70% of all your needs. IMHO its the daddy by a mile !!!

Simon C
 Smile



Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Reply 13, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5576 times:

Well I have to say that for versatility alone the 35-350mm L from Canon takes some beating. Such a shame they don't make it any more but you do see a few on the second hand market every now and then.


G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
User currently offlineCX777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 153 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5539 times:

Agree with Simon, Canon's 70-200/f2.8 is the lens that comes in my mind.
However the one I have is a non-IS. Besides not counting the obvious advantages in handheld & light situations, the non-IS version is a tad bit superior (lens construction wise) I cannot find the thread on photo.net but non IS have fewer elements than their IS counterparts making them a bit better (this applies to Nikon's VR and the other brands).
My 0.02 cents.
Raj


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9623 posts, RR: 68
Reply 15, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5529 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

any self-respecting photog must have a 70(or 80)-200 f/2.8 in their bag.

User currently offlineManzoori From UK - England, joined Sep 2002, 1516 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5525 times:

Quoting FlyingZacko (Thread starter):
I would even say, almost all of the Canon Photographers here have either one of these lenses.

ummm.... no!  box 

In terms of bang for buck then the BIGMA, AKA Sigma 50-500 EX pushes all the right buttons for me... just wish Sigma would hurry up and put the damned OS on it!  Wink

Cheers!

Rez
 Big grin



Flightlineimages DOT Com Photographer & Web Editor. RR Turbines Specialist
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5511 times:

Quoting Manzoori (Reply 16):
ummm.... no!   

In terms of bang for buck then the BIGMA, AKA Sigma 50-500 EX pushes all the right buttons for me... just wish Sigma would hurry up and put the damned OS on it!  

Cheers!

Rez
 

I agree 100% I went out and used it last saturday and discovered just how sharp it is again. Love my bigma.


User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 18, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5495 times:

The mother of all lenses is w/o a doubt the Canon 600mm f4 L IS!

The price for the 1200mm f5.6 is about 60.000 EUR.

Back to your question:

If you have the choice between the IS and non IS, go for the IS version. It might be a little bit more expensive but from personal experience I can tell you the IS is worth every penny. I own the 70-200 f2.8 L IS and what a sweet lens that is!

f2.8 all the way, if money is not the issue.
Joe Pries (some of you guys don't know him) said it once and many other great photographers before him.....do it right and buy once. You will not regret it. The resell value is much higher too!

But where are you able to pick up a 70-200 f2.8 IS in Germany for under 1600 EUR? I did a quick check at various online stores and the price for it is between 1700 and 1900 EUR.

Vasco


User currently offlineTS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5468 times:

Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 18):
But where are you able to pick up a 70-200 f2.8 IS in Germany for under 1600 EUR? I did a quick check at various online stores and the price for it is between 1700 and 1900 EUR.

Are you a reborn Canonian now, Vasco? Come on, you can tell ... Big grin


User currently offlineSpencer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1635 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5461 times:

Vasco, I've got a little variation on Joe's phrase there, it goes like this, "By cheap, buy twice!". Anyways, from a spotter/photog standpoint, then, if it's Canon they're after, I'd have to say the 100-400mm L IS USM. Both for the range and the quality. OK, it's f5.6 stretched out, but if the light's right, oh la la! Yeah, I'd go for the 100-400. I haven't tried the 200 with the TC on, it's supposed to out-do the 100-400 all the way. But I have the 100-400 and won't be investing in anything else right now. The 17-40mm f4L USM is a very very good lens too, as Tim pointed out. (I use a 20D BTW).
Spencer.



EOS1D4, 7D, 30D, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 70-200/2.8 L IS2 USM, 17-40 f4 L USM, 24-105 f4 L IS USM, 85 f1.8 USM
User currently offlineLHRSIMON From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 1343 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5451 times:

Agree with Spencer with regards the 17-40 L F/4.0 USM. As a general about town/family/close up airfield lens. Very very good for limited range...

Can i also add that the 135 mm F/2.0 L USM is the sharpest and quickest lens i have ever owned. Even beats the 70-200 L IS USM f/2.8. But its let down for the obvious reason , Range and flexibility !!!! So the 70-200 wins !!

Simon C
 Smile



Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
User currently offlineSleekjet From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2046 posts, RR: 22
Reply 22, posted (9 years 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5447 times:

The 70-200 L f/4 is fantastic and slap an extender on it and you've got great stuff.

But.....

I bought the 100-400 IS L in March and the 70-200 has been in my bag ever since. I simply needed the distance and the IS.

But if money is an issue, I'd go the 70/200 w/extender route.



II Cor. 4:17-18
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Reply 23, posted (9 years 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5381 times:

Mmmmmm 500F4 shortly followed bythe 300F2.8.
500 is light enough to hand hold and easily potable with enough length toget killer images at any airport no matter how far away you are.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Howie



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Howie


Once you have used a big prime you really never want to go back to using a zoom and i have a bag full of em.
Cheers
Darren



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9623 posts, RR: 68
Reply 24, posted (9 years 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5379 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

500mm is totally not practical.

You just going to keep it in your car


25 Post contains images Dehowie : WHat car i had to sell it to buy the 500 [Edited 2005-08-02 01:55:50]
26 FlightCheck : The 400mm f2.8L IS USM is an absolute beast! K
27 Dehowie : Yea i almost put my shoulder out trying to hand hold that monster at an F18 display. I think i walked crooked for about 3 days afterwards!! Dazz
28 Post contains images 7FTwinOtter : Not for aviation photography but this is the lens I lust after; the fastest 35mm lens in current production the leica noctilux M 50mm f/1 asph - $3,59
29 Clickhappy : now that is fast glass!
30 Post contains images Bo__einG : Holycrap! An f/1 lens!! I've never seen anything like that. Unbelivable.. For me I like the 80-200 ED lens of Nikon. The VR version is better but much
31 Dehowie : How big is that F1?? Doesn't look much larger than a normal 50 and F1 would be amazing for street shots etc. Dazz
32 Post contains links and images FlyingZacko : As a matter of fact I recall seeing photos from FRA in the db taken by someone using Canon's 28-300mm lens. View Large View MediumPhoto © David
33 Post contains images IL76 : Canon has a 50mm f1.0, so it's not that special: cheers, Eduard
34 Chris78cpr : I have used the Noctilux on an M6 and it's a nice bit of glass but totally impractical for shooting day to day stuff. Just like the canon 50mmF1.0L.
35 7FTwinOtter : Nice to see a rangefinder fan, i have a 35mm f/2.5 color scopar on my bessa R, that is a cracking lense for the money. i have no experience with leic
36 Post contains images 7FTwinOtter : I forgot about these, made in solid gold for the sultan of Brunai, they are selling a pair comprising of a Leica 35mm F1.4 summilux and a 50mm F2 Summ
37 Chris78cpr : Leica wont fold, the delay of release of the module R has hindered their profit margins this year, the module had significant R+D costs which have ye
38 Post contains links and images 7FTwinOtter : I don't foresee a large market for the digital R module, I would say the same about the much hyped digital M. I do think a small very high quality in
39 Post contains images Maiznblu_757 : The Canon 500mm F/4 L IS is the perfect big prime IMO. Even with the 1.4x extender you get pin sharp images. I have used the Canon 400mm F/2.8 L IS on
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Is The Meaning Of F/4-5.6 In A Lens? posted Tue Feb 7 2006 14:21:08 by TACAA320
What Is The Cost Of A 200mm Lens? posted Thu Jun 28 2001 16:56:23 by Thom@s
What Is The Meaning Of "motive" Rejection? posted Wed Apr 5 2006 09:35:44 by Walter2222
What Is The Registration Of This 747? posted Wed Oct 25 2000 21:08:08 by OO-VEG
What Is The Biggest Lens You've Seen? posted Thu Oct 21 2004 17:05:27 by MADtoCAE
Cyeg - What Is The Problem With Security? posted Fri Sep 29 2006 23:06:26 by Psyops
With A Limited Budget What Is The Best SLR? posted Sat Jul 29 2006 19:43:11 by COEXpilot
The Question Of All Time: Best Camera? posted Wed Apr 19 2006 21:54:50 by Schreiner
What Is The Problem!? posted Tue Feb 21 2006 14:46:56 by Martin21
What Is The Difference? posted Thu Dec 8 2005 15:19:41 by Nirmalmakadia