how often do you use a 70-200 lens - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Wedding / Event Videography Techniques

Wedding / Event Videography Techniques
Shooting non-repeatable events: weddings, recitals, plays, performances...


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 8th, 2011, 01:16 PM   #16
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 55
I appreciate everyone's input on my question.

Actually I was thinking of getting a used Sigma when I posted this. So if there are any Sigma lens users out there, your input would be great.

And Travis, I just read the latest EventDV article. Thank you for choosing Miami instead of San Diego. You would have killed all the business here for everyone else.
Gerald Labrador is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 01:45 PM   #17
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Santa Ana, CA
Posts: 499
If you do go with the 135, you can also get the 1.4 teleconverter.
Greg Fiske is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 06:10 PM   #18
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, UK
Posts: 309
i did ALOT of looking into which 70-200 to buy

between:

sigma

Tamron

Canon (2.8 IS, 2.8 non IS, f4 IS, f4 non IS)

decided right away the f4 canons as low light is my main priority.

Neither the tamron or the sigma have IS

the canon was too expensive, and general consensus between the sigma and the tamron was that the tamron was the better of the 2 (both pretty much the same price, at least they were when I was buying last year)


So i bought the tamron, thinking that IS wouldnt be too much of an issue as most of my shooting is on tripod or monopod.

After about 6 months of shooting with the tamron, I;ve came to the conclusion that even on a tripod, IS does a whole lotta work for you.


With the Tamron, even on sticks and especially at the 200mm end, if you breath near the camera, you will get judder, jello, motion, shaky (pick your term)

Now I still think its good for the money, but I kinda wish I'd saved up and got the canon 2,8 WITH IS (or maybe even the f4 with IS, but I often shoot with the tamron wide open at 2.8 (almost every wedding for the speeches I've got the Tamron 70-200 on my 7d, and the canon 17-55 on my 550d.

So I'd say if you afford to save up a but, get the Canon with IS, but I think the IS is a really underestimated element with the long lenses.

My 2 pence

James
James Strange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 06:20 PM   #19
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 1,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Strange View Post

After about 6 months of shooting with the tamron, I;ve came to the conclusion that even on a tripod, IS does a whole lotta work for you.
That is so true. When you're long, unless you're on a concrete floor, you will get some visible shake when anyone moves anywhere near the camera/
Jim Snow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 06:26 PM   #20
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 387
The Sigma have released the OS (Optical Stabilizer) version priced around $1300.. I haven't try it yet but seems promising.

I used to have Canon f4L and I agree, when someone walks near the tripod the shake is quite visible especially at the long end
Johannes Soetandi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 06:27 PM   #21
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 2,933
Sigma isn't horrible glass, but it's also not L-series Canon glass either. My thought was two-fold when we purchased our 70-200's. First, lenses are like an investment .. sort of. Buy a great lens and unless you drop it in a lake it's going to last a long time. The second thing was that the Sigma focus rings spin the opposite of Canon's, and that can really mess you up in the heat of the moment. So I stuck with Canon.
__________________
Black Label Films
www.blacklabelweddingfilms.com
Travis Cossel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 07:27 PM   #22
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 2,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerald Labrador View Post
And Travis, I just read the latest EventDV article. Thank you for choosing Miami instead of San Diego. You would have killed all the business here for everyone else.
I'm starting to get bored in Miami ... d;-p
__________________
Black Label Films
www.blacklabelweddingfilms.com
Travis Cossel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2011, 10:49 PM   #23
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Manila
Posts: 317
Not as much now since I got a 135 2.0.
Jason Magbanua is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2011, 12:59 AM   #24
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 622
I own 85mm, 135mm, 70-200 f4 and 70-200 f2.8is

During ceremony, when it is a big church, we use both 70-200 so we can stand as far as we can with our 5ds.

If its relatively small space, i would pick 135 for my monopod and 70-200 on tripod.

If i need to choose between the 3, i would choose 70-200.

135 is too gorgeous to be missed though....
__________________
If a picture is worth a thousand words, what about motion picture?
website: www.papercranes.com.au | blog: www.weddingvideosydney.net
Susanto Widjaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2011, 03:33 PM   #25
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Red Bank, NJ
Posts: 553
Is there much of a difference between an older 70-200mm and the new version? The new version is $2,400 but a used lens can go for $1,500. Which would you buy?
Michael Simons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2011, 09:40 PM   #26
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Magbanua View Post
Not as much now since I got a 135 2.0.
"Hail to the king" plays in the background...

If you're shooting more with the 135, that means you're shooting more without IS. For certain, my camera work sucks without IS ...then again, I'm not you. :)
Craig Terott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2011, 09:41 PM   #27
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Simons View Post
Is there much of a difference between an older 70-200mm and the new version? The new version is $2,400 but a used lens can go for $1,500. Which would you buy?
I've heard that there is a great difference. I haven't try it yet, but my housemate is buying one from overseas and soon I'll be trying (and borrowing) his lens for my next wedding :P .. If have the budget, I would buy the Mkii version.. Always rely on the latest technology!
Johannes Soetandi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2011, 09:52 PM   #28
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Manila
Posts: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Terott View Post
"

If you're shooting more with the 135, that means you're shooting more without IS. For certain, my camera work sucks without IS ...then again, I'm not you. :)
Funny enough, I just realized that I don't have a single lens with IS. But the comments here are most enlightening. Maybe next purchase.

I used to love the 70-200 during bridal preps, but it proved too heavy. The 135 is perfect for this situation. Ceremony is still 70-200 for Cam B. My 135 is on Cam A.
Jason Magbanua is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2011, 04:26 PM   #29
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Simons View Post
Is there much of a difference between an older 70-200mm and the new version? The new version is $2,400 but a used lens can go for $1,500. Which would you buy?
You can still get fantastic results with the older.

For those with the APS-C-sized sensor cams (7D, 60D, T2i), a 70-200mm may not be very ideal for weddings where you'll have to be up in the action. The crop factor tightens up your shot tremendously for starters; I had to stand considerably far away from a large dance floor just to get some acceptable medium shots of people dancing. Unless you're standing at the back of a church for the ceremony, I can't see how you're getting "breathable" shots.

Also, it looks great and is easily recognizable by even the lay person as a professional lens, but it's very bulky and heavy. It's awkward to shoot with unless your stabilized in some way, even moreso for the smaller-sensor cams.

This lens was meant for the full-framers, and you'll have a much easier time if so.
Edward Mendoza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2011, 05:38 PM   #30
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 2,933
That's part of the beauty of the lens. You don't have to be so close to people when you're filming them. When people don't know they are being filmed you get more authentic footage. We use 70-200's for every single wedding (not exclusively, of course).
__________________
Black Label Films
www.blacklabelweddingfilms.com
Travis Cossel is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Wedding / Event Videography Techniques

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network