Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Canon 200mm 2.8, or is it a better option?
I am in the marked for a tele lens and the canon 200mm 2.8 looked like a good option for a good price. I will use it for sports, wildlife, alittle macro and some portraits. 97% photo.Since it being a prime, i am a little worried about the flexibility. I will probably buy some extention tubes for macro and some teleconverters for wildlife. Have anybody on here tried it? Is there a better option?
Canon 70-200, worth saving for whatever model you were looking at.
or a 200 2.0L IS
-=|NS MOD SQUAD|=-
Sabotage//SB § http://sabotagesb.com §
NS isn't skiing's immature younger brother... its skiing's future.
Otherwise would've ended up like eheath with an fs100 and nothing to put it on, that stupid idiot.
dat 6000 dollar price tag
dont be scared off by a prime. i much prefer them, they'll make you a stronger photographer in the end. zooms just let you get lazy. my freshman photo professor always said the 3 most important words in photography are MOVE YOUR ASS.
looking back, i would have been pretty okay with it if someone shot me in the face when i was 15. - asian_allen$
All times are Eastern (-4)