JimboCin Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Children's performances/sports - 135mm F/2, 200 F/2.8, or other? | |
I have the 135 f/2.0, the 200 f/2.8, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS Mk II, and previously had the earlier Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS.
Having kids and now grandkids, I shoot all the things you shoot now and will be shooting. Ballet classes, dance recitals, on to college and professional sports.
The 135 f/2.0 and 200 f/2.8 prime lenses are both phenomenal lenses. Reasonably small, reasonably light weight, and reasonably priced. Between the two I would decide based on which focal length you feel would better meet your needs, and how important the f/2.0 of the 135 is to you. (Personally I did not care that much for my 135 with the 1.4x - either the Mk II or the Mk III. I felt the 200 f/2.8 blew it away).
BUT, having said that, knowing what I know now I would not bother with purchasing either of these lenses. That is how darn good the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 Mk II is. Obviously it gives you the range of focal lengths that a prime can't do. The image stabilization is nothing short of phenomenal. For plays, dance recitals, ballet and the like the IS has allowed me to get shots that others simply can't get with lesser equipment. And I have found that it takes a 1.4x VERY well, giving me the equivalent of a 280 f/4.0, which is very useful for field sports such as soccer, football, lacrosse, etc.
It sounds like the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 Mk II may be out of your budget range right now, but sooner or later you WILL have one.
|