f2.8 is it worthwhile.

[DaiTheDragon]

I have the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM which to be honest I have only used a few times. What I am wondering is what is the point of f2.8, the depth of field is so narrow that if you photograph a bird head on, the head will be in focus but the tail will be out of focus. The only advantage I can see is if you are shooting an indoor sports event without flash or something. Does anyone else have this lense and what do you use it for.

Dai

[Boddie]

I hope its worth it as this lens is likely to be my next purchase

[Oy]

One big value of F2.8 is that your lens will focus through it's widest aperture - only stopping down to your selection as you take the photo.

More light to focus with is always an advantage!

[Fourwings]

There's nothing wrong with f2.8 when it comes to 1:1 ratio macro work, its ideal if you are just focusing on part of an insect such as a Dragonflies compound eye, face etc.....

Plus as Dave says it gives you a very fast focusing lens.

[Amber]

And as it's generally brighter through viewfinder than say f5.6, makes manual focussing more fun....

[Seajay]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

I have the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM which to be honest I have only used a few times. Does anyone else have this lense and what do you use it for.

Dai

I have the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR (IS) so can only comment on that but they should be very similar. It's major advantage is to isolate your subject from the background the boke (or bokeh as the Americans say). It also allows you to use faster shutter speeds in low light conditions and makes it easier to focus and with the VR or IS take handheld shots in low light conditions. As you say there are trade offs with the smaller DOF so try and take you shot with the subject sideways on. It also allows the use of a converter and the loss of one or two stops depending on if it's a 1.4, 1.7 or 2x won't kill you! It is relatively light therefore portable. A good lens, fitted with a converter to go for a nature walk with. I'm waiting for the Canon 500D close-up lens to arrive to add to it's versality but will have to see Monday or Tuesday what the verdict will be. Finally it is an excellent build with an equally excellent reputation as I am sure the Canon version is so I cannot for the life of me see why you are knocking it!

[Seajay]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

I have the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM which to be honest I have only used a few times. Does anyone else have this lense and what do you use it for.

Dai

I have the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR (IS) so can only comment on that but they should be very similar. It's major advantage is to isolate your subject from the background the boke (or bokeh as the Americans say). It also allows you to use faster shutter speeds in low light conditions and makes it easier to focus and with the VR or IS take handheld shots in low light conditions. As you say there are trade offs with the smaller DOF so try and take you shot with the subject sideways on. It also allows the use of a converter and the loss of one or two stops depending on if it's a 1.4, 1.7 or 2x won't kill you! It is relatively light therefore portable. A good lens, fitted with a converter to go for a nature walk with. I'm waiting for the Canon 500D close-up lens to arrive to add to it's versality but will have to see Monday or Tuesday what the verdict will be. Finally it is an excellent build with an equally excellent reputation as I am sure the Canon version is.

[DaiTheDragon]

Seajay, im'e not nocking it, it's a fantastic lens but as I shoot 95% wildlife I don't seem to have much use for it. The only time I use it is in the summer at motor racing events for my panning shots.

Dai

[Seajay]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

Seajay, im'e not nocking it, it's a fantastic lens but as I shoot 95% wildlife I don't seem to have much use for it. The only time I use it is in the summer at motor racing events for my panning shots.

Dai

Ok Dai I see. I tried to edit the last remark off as when I read it sounded offensive and of course that is not the way I meant it to be, but, Sod's Law you got both posts! Sorry mate! I don't know how the Canon 70-200 is with converters but it's well worth a try. Perhaps you could borrow one? It really does show how versatile the lens is and I'm sure you'd come to love it for wildlife too!

[nightshade]

First telephoto I bought 200mm 3.5 longed for 2.8
to keep the shutter speeds up
As you have one bought and paid for why not leave
it on the camera and give it a fair crack a man of your
skill ought to find it dead handy and soon get the technique
especially as it will probably focus down to 5ft certainly with a 12mm tube

[jasongallier]

I use a 70-200 Is L 2.8 and it is a great bit of kit.

I also use lens (with and without convertors) for larger mammals or habitat/environment photographs.

F2.8 has several advantages most of which have been discussed but. If you think 200 F2.8 has a narrow DOF then try a 500mm F4.0 or 600mm F4.0!

- quick atuo focus (my 5d gives a cross-hair focusing with such a fast lens)
- reduced depth of field is an advantage (used creatively)
- still F4.0 with 1.4x convertor or 5.6 with 2x (autofocus and IS still work)
- you can always stop down - F8.0 for your bird example but a slow lens can't be speeded up!
- add 12mm or 25mm extension tube for great macro lens

Don't give it up just yet!

jason

[paulthomas]

Originally Posted by DaiTheDragon

Seajay, im'e not nocking it, it's a fantastic lens but as I shoot 95% wildlife I don't seem to have much use for it. The only time I use it is in the summer at motor racing events for my panning shots.

It's an ideal lens for certain types of wildlife - Badgers for instance.