RedWhiteandRed wrote:
No - the zoom lens in general offers a disappointing result.
No, your copy does. I've seen great images from my 70-200 2.8 IS and from many others. At 200mm the results are very similar to the results shown here.
Lord Fluff wrote:
Nice shot Sejanus. Be honest - is it really 'worth it' over the 2.8IS zoom? Can you instantly tell the difference?
Yes. I use my 70-200 a lot, it's a cracker of a lens at weddings. But the 200 1.8 is something else
It is heavy. It is awkward. It is bloody hard to focus. But the optics from it really stand out. When you get a shot from it at 1.8 or 2'ish it really is unique.
Lord Fluff wrote:
No, your copy does. I've seen great images from my 70-200 2.8 IS and from many others. At 200mm the results are very similar to the results shown here.
Show me a pic from your 70-200 that you think matches anything that I can show with my 1.8
