8:56 yeah my heart got swallowed by my stomach when you said the 70-200 was 1800 bucks 😂😂😂 MAYBE you’re talkin about the f4 version (not sure but makes sense if true) but naaah that thing $2500 on sale retail $28 of them things easy
Hi Joey (appreciate this is coming some time after your review), in terms of of photography and the 1 over focal length “rule” I think its worth mentioning the IS , I’ve been staggered using this lens onto the R5 or R7 at what can be achieved hand held without having to go ballistic on the ISO, in fairness I’m not a sports photographer but I’m not sure how many wildlife photogs operate at beyond sunset sunrise. Would be interesting to get your views on the new 200 - 800 which seems popular without breaking the bank, although from what I’ve seen I’m more than happy to stick with my 100-500. Cheers from NZ
@@joeypusateri_ Its a standing joke down here that we often get left off world maps 😀 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omission_of_New_Zealand_from_maps?wprov=sfti1# and at times honestly I’m fine with that 👍
I'm fairly new to photography and even newer to sports photography. My question is, why is variable AP such a big deal given the ability to rework exposure and whatnot in LR? I'm considering pulling the trigger on this lens for our football games, mostly in the afternoon (youth football), but I want to shoot the HS games as well, so I'm really interested.
i think it would be a great lens in your case. the tough thing is at night games and the change of exposure as you zoom. If youre shooting photo it isnt as big of a deal, but video it will be tough to shoot at 7.1 at night.
That 100-500 is a great second lens, as soon as the sun sets you need an f2.8. It is only for day time sports. Big limitation compared to the f2.8. Happy shooting.
@@joeypusateri_ I have one and I work under old stadium lights. Early in August you may get the first half in but thats about it. I use an old ef 300 f2.8. Works great. Good luck.
this video is my introduction to you and i knew i fw you at “pause” 😂 great info and beautifullll shots!
Hahaha appreciate your support
I think there may be an error in your video Joey. The 70-200 2.8 is $2799, not $1799.
ahhh good catch, sorry about that!
8:56 yeah my heart got swallowed by my stomach when you said the 70-200 was 1800 bucks 😂😂😂 MAYBE you’re talkin about the f4 version (not sure but makes sense if true) but naaah that thing $2500 on sale retail $28 of them things easy
zoom always have variable aperture, when you reduce the field of view less light get in. Not a weakness of the lens. A zoom is a zoom.
as long as it is a day game the lens can keep up!
Hi Joey (appreciate this is coming some time after your review), in terms of of photography and the 1 over focal length “rule” I think its worth mentioning the IS , I’ve been staggered using this lens onto the R5 or R7 at what can be achieved hand held without having to go ballistic on the ISO, in fairness I’m not a sports photographer but I’m not sure how many wildlife photogs operate at beyond sunset sunrise. Would be interesting to get your views on the new 200 - 800 which seems popular without breaking the bank, although from what I’ve seen I’m more than happy to stick with my 100-500. Cheers from NZ
Amazing to see you here from across the world
@@joeypusateri_ Its a standing joke down here that we often get left off world maps 😀 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omission_of_New_Zealand_from_maps?wprov=sfti1# and at times honestly I’m fine with that 👍
I'm fairly new to photography and even newer to sports photography. My question is, why is variable AP such a big deal given the ability to rework exposure and whatnot in LR? I'm considering pulling the trigger on this lens for our football games, mostly in the afternoon (youth football), but I want to shoot the HS games as well, so I'm really interested.
i think it would be a great lens in your case. the tough thing is at night games and the change of exposure as you zoom. If youre shooting photo it isnt as big of a deal, but video it will be tough to shoot at 7.1 at night.
mhmm good analysis 👍
Possible to do portraits with this lens? Btw loved the review video ❤🤙
without a doubt! i would go towards the 70-200 as more of a portrait lens but this could work!
That 100-500 is a great second lens, as soon as the sun sets you need an f2.8. It is only for day time sports. Big limitation compared to the f2.8. Happy shooting.
Yah it is tough once the sun goes down. Amazing lens tho. With denoise tech I wonder how big of a deal it’ll be as we move forward
@@joeypusateri_ I have one and I work under old stadium lights. Early in August you may get the first half in but thats about it. I use an old ef 300 f2.8. Works great. Good luck.
The Hat and Tee is 🔥
Need that Elwood sponsorship!
Great video! What was the second background song??
not really sure, something from Artlist!
@@joeypusateri_ pleaseee help us find it! 😭😂
I think your rf 70-200 price was off by $1000. Unless you were meaning the EF version which I think that's even low for that one.
Not sure! Could have been a promotion running during the time I made this video. Sorry about that but thanks for catching it
Buen video
Loose the background music please, its so distracting.
a lot of peeps walking the street with f8. on real film. mmmm just saying
Interesante
Like