Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Sooo, which 70-200 2.8?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SkvLTD" data-source="post: 336892" data-attributes="member: 12855"><p>VR II is out of budget like a race horse, VR1 I read rather mixed reviews about and fact that it was made in pre-FX digital days, so the choices might be between Siggy or Tammy. Would probably let my 70-300 go since it will be inferior and redundant, so ~350 budget boost will also help quite a bit.</p><p></p><p>Else, I looked through some reviews and comparisons of 24-70s, and I just don't see them being as useful as a 70-200, even indoors, given the chunk of money they cost. Would be cheaper to just get a 50 or a 35 prime for low light, general indoor stuff.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SkvLTD, post: 336892, member: 12855"] VR II is out of budget like a race horse, VR1 I read rather mixed reviews about and fact that it was made in pre-FX digital days, so the choices might be between Siggy or Tammy. Would probably let my 70-300 go since it will be inferior and redundant, so ~350 budget boost will also help quite a bit. Else, I looked through some reviews and comparisons of 24-70s, and I just don't see them being as useful as a 70-200, even indoors, given the chunk of money they cost. Would be cheaper to just get a 50 or a 35 prime for low light, general indoor stuff. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Sooo, which 70-200 2.8?
Top
