this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Photography

1 readers
1 users here now

A place to politely discuss the tools, technique and culture of photography.

This is not a good place to simply share cool photos/videos or promote your own work and projects, but rather a place to discuss photography as an art and post things that would be of interest to other photographers.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
communick@viewfinder.pro
1
How big of a difference is f/4 and f/2.8 (alien.top)
submitted 11 months ago by WMUBronco1994@alien.top to c/photography@viewfinder.pro
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I want to photograph a few sporting events locally.

2.8 is obviously a lot more expensive, but is it worth it?

70-200 lens

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] LiveComfortable3228@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

IMHO, yes, it is worth it.

The 70-200 2.8 is a super versatile lens, you can do sports, portraits, landscape, etc. This is one of those that you buy once and you keep for 10+ years.

I got a 2nd hand Tamron 2.8 and is super fast and super sharp at 2.8. It was expensive but didnt break the bank.

IMHI is a long term investment you wont regret.

[โ€“] Rifter0876@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

I haven't even moved up to the 70-200. Still rocking the push/pull 80-200 f2.8D(nikon) over here lol. It is my most used lens indoors. It and the 50mm f1.4D. Have rented and shot the 70-200 several times just can't justify the cost to buy when the 80-200 is doing the job.