What use is a 70-200?
 

In another thread just now, I was reminded of a question that has puzzled me on and off for quite a while. It is this: what do people actually use mid-range telephoto lenses for? 70-200 was just an example, I'm curious what part lenses in that general class (let's say over 60mm to around 250 on a 1.6 crop format, or around 100 to 300 on 35mm) play in people's photography.

(As will be obvious from the question, I don't have a lens in that range unless you count the 100-400 which could just about be a 400 prime the way I use it 99% of the time, and have never particularly felt a need to add one. So this is just idle curiosity.)

What do you use your 70-200 (or 150mm prime, or etc.) for?

I use this lens on ocasions for landscapes at the wide end (can give a completly different pespective than wider lens). It is also very handy for things like Zoo's and wildlife parks BUT mostly I use mine for wildlife and Birds, yes I know every one will say that 200mm is to short for birds but when I add the 1.4 tc (280mm) it gives me a full frame equivalent of 448mm with very good quality. I can crop and blow up a little and still get a better result than a lot of inferior 300-400 lenses.
All of my bird shots on my web site have been taken with the 70-200 f4 L.
The lens I am after is the 400mm f5.6 prime but they are like gold dust to find.

I use my 100-300 for:
Still life subjects, details on buildings, street scenery/objects, candids of people, some landscapes, all sorts of inanimate objects really.

Different people have different styles and subjects, it's what makes photography so versatile.

I'm planning on getting a 50-200 to replace my 100-300 at some point as it will be a nice gap filler between my 18-55 and 135-400.

Duncan.

I believe 100-300 is very popular for the sports photographer.

Swans and dogs mainly - 80-200mm rather than 70-200mm though - f2.8 so it's fast when the light's poor - add a 2x and you've got a 160-400mm for extra reach. Would'nt be without it!! The 1.5x gives me a 300mm f2.8 - long enough for photographing birds in my garden too!

I am about to swap 80-400VR f4.5-5.6 for 70-200VR f2.8, like greypoint I can see benefit in a fast lens that can be used with teleconvertors to boost its reach. It seems a good versatile range for general outdoor photography in all weathers.

I have used a Canon 70-200, 2.8 for several years for all purposes. I shoot many professional sports- football, auto and bicycle racing, motorcycles, hydroplanes, etc. It is on one of my cameras at least 70% of the time. Now, with the digitals, it gives even more reach, and if needed, a 1.4 will capture almost everything you need. It is mobile, not always in need of a monopod, sharp and fast.

I agree with you DC - For most all outside shooting I have my 70-200AFSVR on the camera and carry a TC1.7e. it does restrict the stop to f4 though.

I have just ordered a 300AFS f4 to get that little extra reach and with the TC will probably get f.5.6.

I use my 70-200 IS for...
 

I use my 70-200 IS mainly for sports photography, especially motocross. F2.8 is very, very nice for those indoor tracks and other less than ideal lighting situations. I also find it a very handy walkaround lens, it's good for many different applications but really excels at sporting events.

Russ

http://www.russjonesphoto.com/images/image000418.jpg

Thankyou for those answers, gentlemen, I think I'm a little clearer now. Russ, your shot is a great illustration of what you can do with a 70-200!

Quite by chance, I ran into a guy with a Canon 70-200 on the weekend. He saw my 100-400 and I saw his 70-200 at the same time, and we both wanted to try the other one out, so we swapped for a short while. (I'd never actually seen one in the flesh before.) We were short on time, which was a pity as he had a Sigma 12-24 and we could have had some fun comparing with my Canon 10-22.

Well you certainly operate at opposite ends of the lens spectrum. 10-22 and 500mm. :D

Don

Just so, Don. Those are my two most-used lenses. I use all five regularly (100-400, 18-55 and 60mm macro as well) but my most-used lens is the 500 for birds (with or without 1.4TC, and most of the time with a 12mm tube to bring the MFD down a bit), followed by the 10-22 for landsapes.

Which one could I not live without? The 500. (Well, I can get by with the 100-400, but if I could only have one lens it would have to be a big telephoto.) But the lens I love using the most is the 10-22. I keep waiting for the novelty to wear off, but I've had it three months now and enjoy it more than ever.

I know what you mean. Since moving to DSLR true wide angle is the lens I miss the most. My wants list just keeps growing. :rolleyes:

Don

I use my 70-200 mainly for wedding candids. A hugely versatile lens for those of us pursuing the PJ style of shooting.

[ Bodies - D200 w/ MB-D200 grip & D70 || Glass - Nikkor 12-24mm f4 DX, Nikkor 18-200mm DX VRII, Sigma 30mm f1.4, Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF-D, Nikkor 28-70mm f2.8, Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR, Nikkor TC17-IIE TC || SB-800 Speedlight || Manfrotto 055PRO & 488RC2 tripod, Manfrotto 685B Neotec & 234RC monopod || Lowepro NatureTrekker AWII & Stealth Reporter 500AW bags ]

Thats a pretty imressive list of kit there. A Nikon fan by any chance. :rolleyes:

Don

Is it obvious?

All pays for itself though.

Appologies, I was stunned by your list and did not realise you are new here but I did recognise the name.

So welcome to the forum. :)

As there is nothing here re the D200 it would be interesting to hear your comments.

Don

Hi Tannin!

Here are a few uses I found for my 70-200 F2.8 this past week. (click for larger version) This is the first real outing I've had with this lens and I was rather happy with the results.

A neat looking tree stump I ran into
http://static.flickr.com/52/125959600_d01f0cc54f.jpg

Anyone know what animal this is?
http://static.flickr.com/47/126316992_cc696a50e5.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/50/126763901_a194cc0563.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/50/126763902_a3dac148b3.jpg