Photo Tips Go Now
Glamour, Beauty, Nude, Models, Photographers

*    |  Register  


 
Go Back   Garage Glamour™ > Garage Glamour™ Main Forums > Tech Talk Forum
 

Tech Talk Forum Photography & Technical Related Only!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-10-2005, 03:23 PM   #1 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Member GG#: 41021
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 92
Comments: 0

PhotoDave is offline IP: 65.211.224.2
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Using with a Nikon D70, any "real" difference in these lenses besides price? Would like to hear your opinion. Going to a supershoots soon and only have a 4.5 currently. Will I wish I had bought the 2.8 prior to the shoot? Thanks in advance.
  View Public Profile Find More Posts by PhotoDave
 
Re: 70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-10-2005, 05:16 PM   #2 (permalink)
Lifetime Photographer
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Member GG#: 36657
Posts: 403
Comments: 0

That_Look_Photography is offline IP: 68.200.100.150
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I have thew 2.8 and love it. My feeling is if your on the beach you would want the 2.8 and if your in the studio the 4.5 would be fine.

Mike

That Look Photo
  View Public Profile Send a private message to That_Look_Photography Visit That_Look_Photography's homepage! Find More Posts by That_Look_Photography
 
Re: 70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-10-2005, 05:28 PM   #3 (permalink)
Bill Brittain
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member GG#: 40409
Location: Frederick, MD USA
Posts: 84
Comments: 0

BillBrittain is offline IP: 68.67.210.245
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I have the 2.8 VR, and when travelling light it is the only lens I use. Shooting outdoors, I appreciate the additional light gathering capacity and control over depth of field. To really put a dent in your wallet, I recommend the VR, which works very well and gives you just that much more "edge".
  View Public Profile Send a private message to BillBrittain Visit BillBrittain's homepage! Find More Posts by BillBrittain
 
Re: 70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-10-2005, 05:30 PM   #4 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Member GG#: 41021
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 92
Comments: 0

PhotoDave is offline IP: 65.211.224.2
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

I'm a novice so bear with me [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Is your reasoning for the 2.8 at the beach for more light, faster shutter speeds or is it a depth of field thing over the 4.5?
  View Public Profile Find More Posts by PhotoDave
 
Re: 70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-10-2005, 05:56 PM   #5 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member GG#: 40487
Location: Aliso Viejo
Posts: 26
Comments: 0

GreggH is offline IP: 12.177.97.41
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

The depth of field issue certainly is important in the studio but the real difference is image quality. My 80-200 2.8 is far superior to the 70-210 I had. And It was pretty good. The color, contrast, and mostly the sharpness, make the pro lens worth every penny if you can afford it. If I had the money for the VR, it would be a no-brainer decision. If there is one drawback, it's the extra weight, but that's not so bad.
  View Public Profile Send a private message to GreggH Find More Posts by GreggH
 
Re: 70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-11-2005, 12:06 PM   #6 (permalink)
Biker by the Grace of God

 
dynamike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Member GG#: 35237
Location: St Marys
Posts: 1,552
Comments: 0

dynamike is offline IP: 69.21.92.10
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Buy the 4.5 and you'll soon find yourself wishing you had the 2.8. Trust me!

Mike
  View Public Profile Send a private message to dynamike Visit dynamike's homepage! Find More Posts by dynamike
 
Re: 70-200 2.8 vs. 4.5
Old 02-11-2005, 12:29 PM   #7 (permalink)
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Member GG#: 41021
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 92
Comments: 0

PhotoDave is offline IP: 65.211.224.2
 
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Thanks for your input guys. I've secured a Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VR for the supershoots weekend. I'd hate to have any excuse other than my own skills for bad photographs [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
  View Public Profile Find More Posts by PhotoDave
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Sponsors


New To Site? Need Help? Photographer & Model Links
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21 AM.

© 1999-2017 Garage Glamour™




Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93