Tay. Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Christmas is approaching and I think it's time for a new lens :D, I have a Canon. I'm looking for something to mainly shoot dogs in action, particular agility. Not too sure what my budget is right now, but some "affordable" suggestions would be nice What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~*Shell*~ Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 70-200mm 2.8L - second hand it's not that expensive, less than $1000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tay. Posted October 7, 2011 Author Share Posted October 7, 2011 70-200mm 2.8L - second hand it's not that expensive, less than $1000. I was considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4, you'd say the 2.8 is definitely worth the extra money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~*Shell*~ Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 70-200mm 2.8L - second hand it's not that expensive, less than $1000. I was considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4, you'd say the 2.8 is definitely worth the extra money? I've only ever used the f/2.8, though I think poocow has the f/4 and likes it. I use mine mostly around the f/3.5 mark so the f/4 isn't really suitable for me I would like to upgrade mine eventually but it's a GORGEOUS lens and I love it. I'm not in a huge rush. I have a bunch of other stuff I want first. I bought it to photograph dog sports but I've used it for a lot of portraits too and it's beautful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tay. Posted October 7, 2011 Author Share Posted October 7, 2011 (edited) You sell it well, Shell Another question , With IS or not? Is it worth it? Edited October 7, 2011 by DogSportObsessed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirislin Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 (edited) you wont need the IS for sports and agility because you will most likely have a fast shutter speed. It's probably needed more for portraits. I've got the IS version and to be honest I think I could have saved myself alot of money and gone without it. If you're shooting mainly in daylight the f4 might do you. here's the f4 without IS archive. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142739 and here's what it's selling for on DWI. a month ago it was only $666 (ooh, that's the devils number ) Edited October 7, 2011 by Kirislin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 the 70-200 lenses are awesome. I personally think the IS is very much worth it and wouldn't own a lens in this range without it. But choosing a zoom for action is also dependent on how far away you will be. The most versatile for me with shooting my dogs on the beach etc is the 100-400L. I don't lose much on the short end over the 70-200 and I gain a significant amount so I can shoot them further away or zoom in for close ups. As with all things, expect a trade off. It's heavier and its widest aperture isn't as wide as my 70-200 which means in lower light I have to a) up the ISO and/or b) lower the shutter speed. Once you learn to use the bulk & weight (of any lens) you should be able to push the boundaries of shutter speed - I can hand hold the 100-400 extended to 400 at 1/15 while shooting a stationary object, for instance. If you are going to get nice and close to the action, something even wider than the 70-200 could work, too. It really all depends on your distance and what else you like to shoot to get the best bang for your buck. there are also good lenses like the 18-200/250ish range out there. They again don't have quite the aperture range, but they do a very good job and are an excellent all purpose walk around lens. Whatever you get, remember that action shots are not easy and you will throw away about 100 shots for every one you keep. It takes time and patience and practice to start nailing shots - especially when you start experimenting with nice wide apertures. I don't want to hijack this thread but I may be selling my Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS next month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tay. Posted October 8, 2011 Author Share Posted October 8, 2011 Thanks for the replies all. I suck at making decisions! I don't want to hijack this thread but I may be selling my Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS next month. If you decide to, do you mind sending me a PM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~*Shell*~ Posted October 8, 2011 Share Posted October 8, 2011 If you can afford it, get the IS version over the non-IS but I have the non-IS and haven't met anything yet that I can't get with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tay. Posted October 8, 2011 Author Share Posted October 8, 2011 Does anyone know anything about the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted October 8, 2011 Share Posted October 8, 2011 yes, the sigma is a fantastic lens and very good bang for buck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCresties Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 (edited) Ok I'm going to throw a much cheaper alternative into the mix for you Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD - just over $400 on B&H http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/728341-REG/Tamron_AFA005C700_SP_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_Di.html I have this and you really can't fault it's capabilities for the price, no it's not a Canon lens but I have been more than happy with it. You get the Tamron equivalent of IS and USM, so you very quick auto focusing, good for those action shots ;) It's worth considering if you're not ready to shell out for a L lens just yet Here are some examples of mine, including captures of dog agility, surfing, and birds and bugs flying. http://flic.kr/s/aHsjt3osCV Edited October 9, 2011 by CrazyCresties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 +1 for CrazyCresties suggestion. So many options! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheena Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I just recently bought a Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 DG Macro from Fletchers for $300 to go with my Canon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tay. Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 Have you tried some action shots yet, sheena? Oh my gosh, so many choices! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheena Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Have you tried some action shots yet, sheena? Oh my gosh, so many choices! I have had a bit of a go, but to get anything really decent, I think it should be mounted on a tripod, for best results, as no matter how hard I try, I am a bit shakey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Just up your shutter speed (and your ISO if need be). A tripod for action is far more trouble than it's worth, imho :D Action is all about practice - expect to toss far more than you keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirislin Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Yep, I agree with kja I've shot as fast as 1/5000th to freeze action, no camera shake there, I dont have a tripod. Keep practising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheena Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Thanks, I will up the shutter speed & try to take in better light. I don't like to up the ISO too much as I feel it makes the pictures grainy....what would you call "too much"??? I like to keep it about no more than 200 or I can see a difference Maybe I am imagining it tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kja Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) You have the 600D right? I can shoot my much older generation 40D to 1600+ if I expose properly. No reason you shouldn't be able to do the same. And yes, it's very common to freak out about "noise". Some software really seems to show it (Lightroom does this but you get used to it and realise it's really fine) and sometimes we view at 400% and freak ourselves out. You can have a lot of "noise" in a photo on your computer monitor and then print it good sized and not see it. Frankly, I don't worry about noise too much anymore on a good exposure as I know it will be fine. Nailing focus and exposure is far more important than pixel peeping for me. yesterday in bright sunshine I was shooting ISO400 and above so I could keep my shutter speed high for the breaching whales and moving boat. Edited October 13, 2011 by kja Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now