Should I?

The sigma 70-200mm is an awesome lens. Very sharp and versatile. I don't dislike it at all, and I've never understood why so many people grab the canon non IS version over this for the money. I have always said/thought that this lens was perfect for me because "I don't need IS because I shoot sports or from a tripod"... This was true, but now I've been rethinking the ability to use a lens like this hand held inside... The ability to use the 300mm IS handheld has proven to me how helpful IS really is. The reason I bring this up is that I now want to upgrade to the 70-200mm 2.8 IS. It's way out of my price range right now, so here's my question....

Should I sell this now and get the 135L? It's also on my wish list and has been for a long time. I've been contemplating going the prime route anyway, so this would answer some questions. It's an awesome lens, and it would be easier to hand hold inside than the 70-200 because of it's size and the availability of f/2.0... so I could use it inside... For the other stuff I shoot the 300mm will cover a over 50% of the shots I've taken with the 70-200 because it had the 1.4TC on it at least half the time and was at 200mm in those cases... the other times the 135L covers one FL, and with a 1.4TC (which it takes very well) it becomes a 189mm f/2.8 so I'm not losing much of the options with the 70-200 considering I also have a 85mm f/1.8...

So does this "trade" make any sense? Would you give up the zoom in favor of the primes knowing it's eventually getting sold for a IS version anyway? I know I'm not keeping this lens, I'm just wondering if selling it for the 135L would be a good idea now, and keep saving for the inevitable 70-200mm IS. Also it could potentially answer my primes -vs- zooms internal question which would mean I wouldn't get the 70-200mm...

This also has something to do with the fact we're expecting a baby. I know I'm going to be shooting a lot more portraits inside in low light now and less sports... So the faster glass would help there (as would IS) so that's a big part of the concern.

I'm just wondering how much I'm going to miss the zoom because I'm swapping lenses. The 85mm, 135L and 1.4TC combined weight less than the 70-200... or at least right at the same mark.

pros:

• 135L is faster at 135mm
• 135L takes the 1.4 TC very well, can use "wide open" as a 189mm f/2.8
• the 85mm + 135L + 1.4TC weight basically the same as the 70-200mm
• it's insanely sharp
• it's more usable inside in low light because of the faster maximum aperture
• it's a prime
  • I like primes
  • I think I want to eventually migrate to all primes and 1 UWA zoom
• I want to eventually upgrade the 70-200 to a IS version anyway, so this lens will eventually get sold anyway...
• this will help me decide if primes are for me, if not I can easily sell the 135L w/o much of a loss.

cons:

• loose 70~79, 81~134, 136~188 & 190~200mm
• might run into situations where I'm swapping lenses and TCs a lot...
• primes aren't as easy to deal with in fast action where subjects change their distance to you (kids running around, airshows, weddings?)
• it will be an even longer wait for the IS purchase as this part of it's budget would go away if I like the prime...

the pros list is a lot longer, I just hate losing such a sharp versatile lens... If I could purchase the 135L on it's own I would, but my budget is fixed so selling the zoom for the prime is my only option.

Id say so, you have been very happy with going primes and Ive heard nothing but great things about the 135. if it turns out you NEED the 70-200 range, you can always pick up an F4 IS.

we can always switch if you need the 70-200 for a weekend as well.

Originally Posted by subimatt

Id say so, you have been very happy with going primes and Ive heard nothing but great things about the 135. if it turns out you NEED the 70-200 range, you can always pick up an F4.

that's the other thing I've been wondering... If I go all primes for 90% of the time but need the zooms sometimes... I'm wondering if the 70-200mm f4 IS would be smarter than the 2.8 version for me... I just love being able to have f/2.8 is needed as well as the IS, but the price difference has me wondering.

also the 4 stop IS on the f/4 version can get the same shutter speeds (in terms of slow shutters in low light) as the f/2.8 because the f/4 version has newer 4 stop is -vs- the f/2.8s 3 stop IS... So you trade the aperture for the better IS, but lose the ability to go to f/2.8 for faster shutter speeds and shallower DOF when wanted.

whoops, ninjad too late. I think for what you do and the 4 stop IS on the F4, that may be the way to go. if need be, you can always borrow / trade mine for your 300 for a weekend.

if you do, please let me know.... I've been looking at one

better yet, why not get the 70-200 f4 IS for $80 more than the 135? Wont be as sharp, but probably better for a moving baby around the house?

because it's not a prime....

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

because it's not a prime....

right, but.... you planned on selling the 135 for the 70-200 anyway... so why not see if the f4 IS will suit your needs than the 2.8?

Originally Posted by subimatt

right, but.... you planned on selling the 135 for the 70-200 anyway... so why not see if the f4 IS will suit your needs than the 2.8?

no no no no noooooooooooooooooooo....

I plan on having a bag full of primes (15FE, 24L, 50 f1.4, 85f1.8, 135L, 300L) as well as a few key zooms... My question is if I like the primes enough I won't need/want the zoom... I'm not planning on selling the 135L for the zoom unless it turns out I really can't stand primes....

My dream kit would be the primes listed above, then 3 zooms as a travel kit: 17-40 or 16-35, 24-70, and either a 70-200 or 100-400... I'm looking for basically a sailing/driving kit where I can only bring 3 lenses and the compromises that go with them would be OK in those instances...

on the other hand I've been wondering if primes would plain work for me in any situation. They're lighter as a group of three then the zoom they replace (but take more bag space) and offer a bunch of advantages. I feel owning both is stupid, but I haven't tested the use of primes enough to know if it's the right answer for me. I do know I doubt I'll go w/o a UWA zoom, simple because a UWA prime is cost prohibitive. The 14mm f/2.8 is a nice lens, but it's crazy expensive. That and each FL is so different primes are much more limiting in that range.

My biggest issue is I seem to always be at one end of a zoom or the other. the 17-40 gets used at 17 or at 40 almost exclusively. Same with all my zooms. And I find I do this because I'm out with just that one lens so it's my only option at the time. Granted if I'm out with just one prime it'll be even worse, but I just don't find myself using any medium ranges in the zooms so why bother with them if I can get better optics with a prime?

gotcha, a full prime setup then the 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 would be nuts. thats $$$ right there. Are the primes really that much better than the L zooms? I havnt dabbled much in primes aside from the 50, so not sure.

Originally Posted by subimatt

Are the primes really that much better than the L zooms?

at f1.4~f2 they sure are...
and once you stop them down a bit to the fastest the zooms are it's also an advantage. It's not that the zooms are bad, it's that the primes are better... Primes also take TCs better and AF faster...

sooooo

technically the 70-200 is sold. I'm just waiting on the check to clear actually. So do I spend some of my money on the 135L now so I'll have it for the weekend, or do I wait until that check clears so I spend the money that's allocated for it?

I want it NOW, but I don't want to use my "real" money for it. Know what I mean?

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

sooooo

technically the 70-200 is sold.

I'll have it for the weekend.

I want it NOW

Order it.

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I want it NOW

STOP IGNORING YOUR CONSCIENCE!!!

Ben did you order it yet?

No, been tied up in meetings....

Thank you for your order.

and I used my own affiliate link...

^ Niiice!!!

I can has tracking number.

I need to remember to bring my 1.4TC to work tomorrow.

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I can has tracking number.

I need to remember to bring my 1.4TC to work tomorrow.

why bother, still wont get you to 70 or 200....

OUT FOR DELIVERY

Looks like the shipper will be up any minute:

Status: Delivered

Niiice!!!

It's here.

the front element is sexy as hell:


nice large hood too:


I can't wait to get it home and see how she works. Right now the minimum focusing distance (.9m, 3') is a bit limiting, but I'm in my office and no where near in any sort of conditions similar to where I see using this... I did throw the tubes on to see how close it can get. With the 36mm it's down to ~1' which is pretty good for a 135mm lens. Again, I didn't buy it for macro anyway, it's just what I've been shooting at work.

I'll be making a lens review thread, probably after the weekend.