Canon 70-200 f4 L Lens - IS or Non IS??
Discussion
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/196-canon-ef-70-...
There are indeed greater differences between the IS and non-IS version of the lens than simply IS.
Both lenses are reviewed for APC format sensors at the site referenced. Only the IS version for Full Format. However I doubt the assessment would be much different with these lenses.
I can't vouch for either of them based on personal use as I went daft and bought the f2.8 IS II. My excuse was that the addition bulk would mean a significant saving on the cost of Gym membership - no longer required once one owns the f2.8 version of the lens ... and so easily justify the extra cost of the thing.
However I have seen lavish praise applied to all versions of the the Canon 70-200 L models.
There are indeed greater differences between the IS and non-IS version of the lens than simply IS.
Both lenses are reviewed for APC format sensors at the site referenced. Only the IS version for Full Format. However I doubt the assessment would be much different with these lenses.
I can't vouch for either of them based on personal use as I went daft and bought the f2.8 IS II. My excuse was that the addition bulk would mean a significant saving on the cost of Gym membership - no longer required once one owns the f2.8 version of the lens ... and so easily justify the extra cost of the thing.
However I have seen lavish praise applied to all versions of the the Canon 70-200 L models.
I have the f2.8 non IS version, which has mainly been used for motorsport photography. the only time I considered moving up to the IS version was when I had a 1D, as the IS versions also have the weather sealing gasket, which matches up to the gasket on the 1D lens mount.
With regards to stabilisation, you shouldn't need a monopod with a 70-200, especially not the f4 version.
With regards to stabilisation, you shouldn't need a monopod with a 70-200, especially not the f4 version.
LongQ said:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/196-canon-ef-70-...
There are indeed greater differences between the IS and non-IS version of the lens than simply IS.
Both lenses are reviewed for APC format sensors at the site referenced. Only the IS version for Full Format. However I doubt the assessment would be much different with these lenses.
I can't vouch for either of them based on personal use as I went daft and bought the f2.8 IS II. My excuse was that the addition bulk would mean a significant saving on the cost of Gym membership - no longer required once one owns the f2.8 version of the lens ... and so easily justify the extra cost of the thing.
However I have seen lavish praise applied to all versions of the the Canon 70-200 L models.
Just brought the F2.8 II myself, what a beast of a lens. There are indeed greater differences between the IS and non-IS version of the lens than simply IS.
Both lenses are reviewed for APC format sensors at the site referenced. Only the IS version for Full Format. However I doubt the assessment would be much different with these lenses.
I can't vouch for either of them based on personal use as I went daft and bought the f2.8 IS II. My excuse was that the addition bulk would mean a significant saving on the cost of Gym membership - no longer required once one owns the f2.8 version of the lens ... and so easily justify the extra cost of the thing.
However I have seen lavish praise applied to all versions of the the Canon 70-200 L models.
However i would maybe go left field. For the price of a new F4 IS you can get a MK1 2.8 with IS, worth a look around for one?
canon's 70-200mm as said above are great lens.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff