Gear itch again lol!

redmonkee

redmonkee

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,653
Name
PHILIP
Edit My Images
No
I have a gear itch once again so just wanted your thoughts on which lens you all prefer to have on your second body.

135 f2L
or
70-200 2.8 IS II

I have the 135L and am very happy with it in terms of sharpness and image quality, however there have been times this season when i've wanted the ability to zoom a little closer or pull back a little wider.

Which would you guys go for and why?
 
You seem to ahve answered your own question.. I ahve the 135 and its stunning... sometimes I ahve wished for more flexibility.. if I was convinced the 70-200 was as good as the 135 I would change.. But I prefer quality over flexibility :)
 
I have both, the 135 comes into its own when the light is low but for flexibility the 70-200mk2 is fantastic, IQ is also extremely good. If you don't need to sell the 135 to purchase the zoom, then keep it.
 
Tugster said:
I have both, the 135 comes into its own when the light is low but for flexibility the 70-200mk2 is fantastic, IQ is also extremely good. If you don't need to sell the 135 to purchase the zoom, then keep it.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem. I would have to sell the 135L (which I love) to fund the 70-200mk2. Do you think the 70-200 matches the 135L in terms of sharpness and bokeh.

I know f2 is handy for low light but as i'll be shooting D1,D2 and championship next season i'm hoping 2.8 would be enough for night games anyway
 
redmonkee said:
Thats the thing Tony. A lot of user reviews suggest this is as sharp as the primes :thinking:
Click to expand...

I would need to see it to believe it.. dunno about yours but mine a complete peach of a lens :)
 
KIPAX said:
I would need to see it to believe it.. dunno about yours but mine a complete peach of a lens :)
Click to expand...

Mine's a peach too, so it seems we have a lovely pair of peaches :lol:

But if the 70-200mk2 is comparable in sharpness and colour rendition to the 135L the surely the extra flexibility of the zoom is a big plus
 
Why not rent/borrow one to do a comparison, see how it compares?

Sam
 
Maybe Tobers will chip in. I know he uses the 70-200 & I think had used a 135 before.
 
If it was not for the f/2.0 of the 135, I would have sold it as soon as I got the 70-200 mk2.... Seriously !
And that is using it with the MkIII and The MkIV
 
Last edited:
OOI, I've had both and have to say that the 70-200 is as sharp as the 135 plus the 4 stops of IS on the 70-200 mk II makes it such a great lens. That said, I have concert photos taken with the 135 wide open where the f2 was essential to capture movement which the f2.8 could not do. The bokeh the 135 f2 creates is magical too. Tough choice, for versatility the zoom is amazing but for pure magical images I'd go for the 135. Gotta say the 85L trumps both IMHO. But the OP may have that already ?
 
gary43 said:
OOI, I've had both and have to say that the 70-200 is as sharp as the 135 plus the 4 stops of IS on the 70-200 mk II makes it such a great lens. That said, I have concert photos taken with the 135 wide open where the f2 was essential to capture movement which the f2.8 could not do. The bokeh the 135 f2 creates is magical too. Tough choice, for versatility the zoom is amazing but for pure magical images I'd go for the 135. Gotta say the 85L trumps both IMHO. But the OP may have that already ?
Click to expand...

hhmmm it is a tough choice cos I know exactly what you mean about the magical bokeh



I just wonder if I could get images like this from a 70-200mk2 :thinking:
 
Quantifying the "effect" of bokeh is somehat difficult but I would say that the out of focus areas in a 70-200 mkII image are more clearly defined and so less attractive IMHO than one captured using a 135L.

Do not want to be flamed, you can create nice backgrounds in a 70-200 mk II image for sure, but I think this aspect differentiates these great lenses.

Just my 2p worth.
 
stick with the 135 its perfect for the footy, imo you won't need a 70-200 unless you start shooting rugby
 
If you want a stunning 200 why not look at the 200f2 ? It is a bucketload of cash and you lose the 70mm end but is uber-sharp, has great IS, takes TCs well (reportedly) and focuses really fast. Just a thought.
 
Rovers_Andy said:
stick with the 135 its perfect for the footy, imo you won't need a 70-200 unless you start shooting rugby
Click to expand...

I hear what you're saying Andy, but something keeps drawing me to the 70-200mm. I also want to shoot more Rugby so the 70-200 would certainly help. Also i'm thinking of uses outside footy and the versatility of the zoom is really appealing.
 
redmonkee said:
I hear what you're saying Andy, but something keeps drawing me to the 70-200mm. I also want to shoot more Rugby so the 70-200 would certainly help. Also i'm thinking of uses outside footy and the versatility of the zoom is really appealing.
Click to expand...

From the above it reads like you WILL be getting the 70-200. My strong advice in which case is definitely to get the mk II.
 
DemiLion said:
Trying to claim that you're popular then? :p :lol:
Click to expand...

haha, no just someone who is very unorganised and doesn't delete old mails lol.
To prove a point this week I bought car insurance for £540 whilst not realising I was already insured with a different company which I paid £470 for :cuckoo: a combo of shocking memory and utter chaos in my 'filing':bang:
 
gary43 said:
From the above it reads like you WILL be getting the 70-200. My strong advice in which case is definitely to get the mk II.
Click to expand...

I know it's looking that way. If i do it'll deffo be the mk2. I suppose i'm worried about the size and weight of the 70-200. also if I could see some portraits shot with the mk2 that'd really help make my mind up.
 
redmonkee said:
I know it's looking that way. If i do it'll deffo be the mk2. I suppose i'm worried about the size and weight of the 70-200. also if I could see some portraits shot with the mk2 that'd really help make my mind up.
Click to expand...

i wouldnt put too much store by examples..you can take good pics wiht any lens under the right conditions... trying one yourself or speaking to someone who has used both is the key

i would put myself in exactly same position as you.. i love the 135 bot if 70-200 came close then I would change over
 
The 70-200 II is superb. I've not used the 135, but the sharpness of the 70-200 is amazing and you've got all the zoom flexibility as well. I'd buy that over the 135 (in fact, I did).
 
The 70-200 2.8L is probably my least used lens, but only because it's a bit short for bird photography and and I have longer lenses, but there's no doubt that the performance for a zoom is exceptional.

This is wide open at f/2.8...

4336_1122201644464942ff1a6f3.jpg
 
Cheers for the sample shots Robin:thumbs:

Just to update you all. I've ordered the 70-200 2.8IS II :bonk: Ordered from Jessops with £500 deposit and rest over 10 months interest free finance.

Also used Quidco so I'll get back 4% :thumbs:

I'm gonna keep my 135L and do a bokeh test on portraits and if I decide I can live without the 135L i'll be selling it.
 
redmonkee said:
Cheers for the sample shots Robin:thumbs:

Just to update you all. I've ordered the 70-200 2.8IS II :bonk: Ordered from Jessops with £500 deposit and rest over 10 months interest free finance.

Also used Quidco so I'll get back 4% :thumbs:

I'm gonna keep my 135L and do a bokeh test on portraits and if I decide I can live without the 135L i'll be selling it.
Click to expand...

Damn you man!!!

I've been semi saving up for one, and that sort of deal is far too tempting, especially as they are only £30 up on the base price at the moment!
 
DemiLion said:
Damn you man!!!

I've been semi saving up for one, and that sort of deal is far too tempting, especially as they are only £30 up on the base price at the moment!
Click to expand...

i make that about 130 quid a month or 30 odd quid a week for 10 mths.
 
KIPAX said:
i make that about 130 quid a month or 30 odd quid a week for 10 mths.
Click to expand...

you make it right Tony :thumbs:

And Jessops are great at paying the cashback through quidco.

in fact I ordered a lens a while ago and returned it for a full refund, and Jessops still paid me the full cashback:thumbs:
 
KIPAX said:
i make that about 130 quid a month or 30 odd quid a week for 10 mths.
Click to expand...

Yup it is, but I meant that Jessops were only £30 more expensive than the current cheapest on Camerapricebuster. They are normally much pricier than that. At £130 pcm my photography is easily paying for that.
 
DemiLion said:
Yup it is, but I meant that Jessops were only £30 more expensive than the current cheapest on Camerapricebuster. They are normally much pricier than that. At £130 pcm my photography is easily paying for that.
Click to expand...

ooh does that mean you're gonna bite the bullet and get one :thumbs:
 
Well it's either that or a 400mm f/2.8 mkII at the moment!
 
I guess it depends what you already have and what will make you most money. I love the 70-200 but a 400/2.8 IS - yes purrlease :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top