View Single Post
      07-31-2009, 08:26 AM   #26
dcstep
Major General
United_States
1290
Rep
7,389
Posts

 
Drives: '09 Cpe Silverstone FR 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Colorado

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2009 M3  [8.40]
Quote:
Originally Posted by UdubBadger View Post
...

So what does everyone think?

70-200mm 2.8 L (non IS) and the 50mm 1.4 = about $1600 total (leaves me $400 for a new bag and nice tripod.
or
70-200mm f4 L (non IS) and 50mm 1.2L = about $2000 total unless I can find some good lightly used deals
I'm worried about the non-IS on your 70-200mm, particularly since you do concerts. You can use them very well for audience perspective shots of the bands. The IS is good for 2 f-stops. Also, even outdoors, when you get to the long end of that zoom, you'll really appreciate the IS. This is a slightly different league, but my 400 f/5.6 L non-IS was only available without IS, but I almost bought a 100-400 zoom instead to get the IS. Even on a monopod, it's hard to keep the center focus-dot centered on the subject.

Having said that, I'd go for the 70-200 f3 L IS with the 50mm 1.4. If the 1.4 is not an L, then I'm worried because it seems like it may end up being your money-lens on stage. If that's true, I take it all back and say you should get the 1.2L before anything else and save to by the 70-200 f4L IS later.

BTW, stage lighting is usually plenty for an f4 in a reasonably fast camera. The trouble is you'll have to make big color balance changes in processing.

Dave
__________________