View Single Post
      07-31-2009, 01:40 AM   #25
UdubBadger
Banned
No_Country
631
Rep
24,685
Posts

Drives: '04 330i ZHP
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago Burbs

iTrader: (22)

Garage List
2004 BMW 330i ZHP  [9.50]
2011 135i  [7.46]
2008 328xi  [8.76]
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMW E90 View Post
Perhaps you should start another thread cus the OP is gonna kick ur ass for taking over his thread.

On a serious note, I don't know if you really need the 50mm 1.2L. I mean I don't know of too many people with it and IMO you probably won't need anything more than 1.8/1.4. I don't know though- you have to try everything out and pick the lenses that are right for your style.

As for the 70-200mm, the F/4.0 is the sharpest of the bunch but the difference is only noticeable if you pixel peep. So if you need/want to use the 70-200mm 2.8 for concerts, I would recommend going with the IS version. Unless you will always have a monopod/tripod on you, IS is helpful in such situations (unless you're able to use a fast enough shutter speed). Of course it's more expensive but you should always have it and don't need it than the other way around. Besides, you could always sell it and buy a 2.8 non-IS later.
hahaha, I'm sure he won't care and if he does... sorry.

See the thing with the IS is that in concerts, you don't want a lot of motion, you want to stop it so shooting at 1/40, even 1/30 with IS is gonna still make them look weird. I try to shoot at 1/125 if possible or minimum 1/60-1/80. I just don't think the IS is necessary so I'd rather have the 2.8 to be able to shoot at 1/60 or above than to shoot at 1/30 with the F4 but have IS on.

With the 50mm 1.2L, the 50mm prime is like my favorite lens and I have the very unreliable 1.8 version. I could just get the 1.4 but I figure I'd actually really like to use it often so maybe I should invest in the 1.2L since it'll be sharper and the bokeh on it will be sick.
you think its a waste of the $1100 difference from the 1.4?
Appreciate 0