Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
I only have a Digital Rebel. Is the 70-200 2.8 IS too much lens for my camera. I have about $1500 to spend and am trying to decide if I should upgrade to the 30D or get this lens, which I've been wanting for ages.
Thanks in advance!
Lisa
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
Doesn't the lens cost more than $1500?
Buy what you need. If the 6MP DREBEL produces the file output quality that satisfies you then get a good lens. Anyway, a lens will out live a body in my opinion. Plus, good glass makes a world of difference and has great resale value.
I say get a good lens.
Just my quick opinion.
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
thanks... yes, it's a little more like $1600-something.... I want this lens so bad, and my husband has agreed we can afford it... but I'm starting to feel a little ill spending this much money on a lens.
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
Since you got the green light - do it!
Manacsa is correct - buy the best lens you can afford first, upgrade your camera second. Remember, bodies all always being updated/upgraded. Lenses not so much so.
Plus, I can't see how they can improve on the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS anytime soon!
If it'll help ease your pain, I too have been thinking about getting a new camera body for about 6 months. Haven't yet - still using my first DSLR (10D). The odometer has been "rolled-over" a few times :D
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
thanks Loopey I appreciate it. I wasn't sure if having this lens with the digital rebel was like having a trailer home with a Rolls parked outside.
Also, I'm hoping soon that the 30D will go down in price even more (fingers crossed..) of course that just means they are coming out with a newer version and seriously, I'll want that!!
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
what will you be using the lens for? The IS is very subjective towards its purpose. If you are doing work that won't require the IS, you can save a good 700 dollars on the purchase of the lens. Just make sure you need it before you invest in it. And I used a 70-200 f/2.8 (non IS) with my drebel for a while before I got my 1d, and I saw a dramatic improvement in the quality of photos. it's a great lens, no doubt.
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltilley
... I wasn't sure if having this lens with the digital rebel was like having a trailer home with a Rolls parked outside....
In this case the Rolls makes the trailer home much nicer. Go for it!
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
think how much other hobbies cost and you will find photography not that expensive. Save your money and do it right . Get your great lens and you great camera. Remember you only live once!
Re: Is the 70-200 2.8 IS "too much lens" for my camera?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltilley
I only have a Digital Rebel. Is the 70-200 2.8 IS too much lens for my camera. I have about $1500 to spend and am trying to decide if I should upgrade to the 30D or get this lens, which I've been wanting for ages.
Thanks in advance!
Lisa
that is so true about what all these folks said. get the great lens, yes I got the 70-200 and love it ever seen but lately I'm shooting wedding and had to shoot it at the end off 200 without flash. man, I wish I bought the IS version but it all depend on what you're shooting.