Canon EF70-200 IS: F/2.8 or 4???
Discussion
Spotted from the gear thread that a lot of PH Canon owners have these lenses in their bag and I could do with some 'real world' advice on whether the extra 'stop' is worth the outlay. I've also been told to avoid the non-IS version because the system functionality is the canines cohoners...again opinions very welcome.
Will be used on a 50D in the near future for varied subjects: mountain biking, cars (road and offroad), candid portrait, rugby, adventure sport etc etc.
Theory says take the 2.8 for the faster shutter speed, low light performance, DOF control and weather proofing but I don't want to spank the £500 increment unnecessarily...equally don't want to look back on a F4 purchase wishing I'd done it right the first time.
Cheers lads...and lasses
Ed
Will be used on a 50D in the near future for varied subjects: mountain biking, cars (road and offroad), candid portrait, rugby, adventure sport etc etc.
Theory says take the 2.8 for the faster shutter speed, low light performance, DOF control and weather proofing but I don't want to spank the £500 increment unnecessarily...equally don't want to look back on a F4 purchase wishing I'd done it right the first time.
Cheers lads...and lasses
Ed
The way I see it is that 1 stop can be crucial; difference between good shot and brilliant shot. So if you can justify the cost (and can afford it), defnitely go for f2.8. I love mine. 
As for weather proofing, I used mine in heavy downpours and there was no problem at all.
As for weather proofing, I used mine in heavy downpours and there was no problem at all.
Edited by Gemm on Friday 2nd January 14:58
I recently bought the cheapest version, the F4 non-IS.
Haven't really had a chance to use it for what I bought it for (motorsport, track days and general car related stuff) but just having a play it's fantastic.
I wasn't overly bothered by the lack of IS, but would definitely have gone for the 2.8 version if I'd have had the money. As has been said, you never know when you'll need the extra stop
Although and F4 non-IS version and a fuller wallet are tempting! Decisions, decisions eh?
On a different note the 70-200's fetch strong money on eBay, so you could buy one and probably lose nothing if you needed to sell having bought the 'wrong' version.
Haven't really had a chance to use it for what I bought it for (motorsport, track days and general car related stuff
) but just having a play it's fantastic.I wasn't overly bothered by the lack of IS, but would definitely have gone for the 2.8 version if I'd have had the money. As has been said, you never know when you'll need the extra stop
Although and F4 non-IS version and a fuller wallet are tempting! Decisions, decisions eh?
On a different note the 70-200's fetch strong money on eBay, so you could buy one and probably lose nothing if you needed to sell having bought the 'wrong' version.
malc350 said:
Just make sure you go to the gym before carrying the F2.8 for any amount of time!
Yep, it's a bit on the heavy side. The f4, however, is often quoted as having a more consistent manufacturing quality - the 2.8 has had some slightly soft copies get out into the wild. That might not be an issue any more though, as it's been out long enough for that to be rectified. Dunno.I borrowed the f4 IS from a friend for an evening's fire festival shoot, and absolutely loved it. When I came to buy my own, I tried out the 2.8 as well and decided that I couldn't justify the cost and weight - however, I WAS about to jet off backpacking, so both were crucial factors for me.
I think that, now I'm back home, if I had the cash, I'd go for the 2.8. But definitely try handling both of them first.
I have the 2.8 and a 1.4II converter so you get the best of both worlds.
I took this photo of Mrs B-T-B coming down Atlantis on the spur of the moment
I had the camera on continuous and it just kept focusing really quickly throughout about 12 photo's until I could see she was really wet
Stats as follows:
Camera: Canon EOS 400D Digital
Exposure: 1/4000 sec
Aperture: f/3.2
Focal Length: 70 mm
I really don't think I would have captured this without the lens (but not at 2.8 as you can see) and then when we went to see Shamu I simply added the 1.4II converter to get close to the action and got some really good shots from near the back of the stadium.
The only downside without doubt is the weight - my right arm is now 6 inches longer than my left
I took this photo of Mrs B-T-B coming down Atlantis on the spur of the moment
I had the camera on continuous and it just kept focusing really quickly throughout about 12 photo's until I could see she was really wet
Stats as follows:
Camera: Canon EOS 400D Digital
Exposure: 1/4000 sec
Aperture: f/3.2
Focal Length: 70 mm
I really don't think I would have captured this without the lens (but not at 2.8 as you can see) and then when we went to see Shamu I simply added the 1.4II converter to get close to the action and got some really good shots from near the back of the stadium.
The only downside without doubt is the weight - my right arm is now 6 inches longer than my left
When I was looking to upgrade from my 70-300IS, I hired a 70-200 f4 IS and loved it - sharp, fast, nice to handle. I then hired a 70-200 f2.8 non IS and frankly didn't think it was anything like as good as the f4. I couldn't afford the f2.8 IS version and as it is nearly twice the weight as the f4 IS, I didn't try one.
Too expensive for me
Bob
Too expensive for me
Bob
I have the 70-200 F4L IS and it is known as "the sharpest Canon zoom lens made" by Photozone and the-digital-picture.com and mine sure is sharp. If I didn't love it I wouldn't have just paid HUGE money for Canon to fix it after I had a little accident travelling with it. I just didn't want to be without this lens, ever!
I have owned (briefly) the F2.8L IS and it's good and if you need the extra stop it's the way to go.
However on a 1DS body and with lens hood fitted you have to be prepapred to carry a mahoosive, lengthy, bulky, heavy setup...
Malc
I have owned (briefly) the F2.8L IS and it's good and if you need the extra stop it's the way to go.
However on a 1DS body and with lens hood fitted you have to be prepapred to carry a mahoosive, lengthy, bulky, heavy setup...
Malc
Not got either, but both are on my wish-list.
Depending on what photography you do, and how much other kit you carry around, don't discount the weight issue...the 2.8 is a mahoosive lens for a 200mm, and as others have said you'll probably feel it after a full day wandering around a race-circuit.
The other question of course is would you take it on holiday...and if so how would you get it on a plane, alongside 5kg of other kit?!?
Depending on what photography you do, and how much other kit you carry around, don't discount the weight issue...the 2.8 is a mahoosive lens for a 200mm, and as others have said you'll probably feel it after a full day wandering around a race-circuit.
The other question of course is would you take it on holiday...and if so how would you get it on a plane, alongside 5kg of other kit?!?
havoc said:
Not got either, but both are on my wish-list.
Depending on what photography you do, and how much other kit you carry around, don't discount the weight issue...the 2.8 is a mahoosive lens for a 200mm, and as others have said you'll probably feel it after a full day wandering around a race-circuit.
The other question of course is would you take it on holiday...and if so how would you get it on a plane, alongside 5kg of other kit?!?
I always try and avoid white lenses overseas, there's nothing like shouting "LOOK AT MY GEAR, IT'S WORTH MORE THAN YOU EARN IN 3 YEARS" Sorry about the obvious shouting, I'm trying to show the impression a 70-200 F2.8 will make in Cambodia....Depending on what photography you do, and how much other kit you carry around, don't discount the weight issue...the 2.8 is a mahoosive lens for a 200mm, and as others have said you'll probably feel it after a full day wandering around a race-circuit.
The other question of course is would you take it on holiday...and if so how would you get it on a plane, alongside 5kg of other kit?!?
Mind you the F4 is white but it is more discrete as it's much smaller. I don't know why Canon don't make equivalent lenses in black for when you need to keep a low profile.
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
Malc
malc350 said:
...in Cambodia....
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
Agree about Cambodia...went there, lovely place, but desperately poor. Felt guilty wandering round even with an old 35mm SLR!
havoc said:
malc350 said:
...in Cambodia....
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
Agree about Cambodia...went there, lovely place, but desperately poor. Felt guilty wandering round even with an old 35mm SLR!
Malc
havoc said:
malc350 said:
...in Cambodia....
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
I would imagine taking one of Canon's lovely L lenses and a 1Ds body to Burma, where they arrest you as soon as they mildly suspect you may even be half-related-to-a-friend-of-someone-who-may-be-a-journalist would be asking for trouble!
Agree about Cambodia...went there, lovely place, but desperately poor. Felt guilty wandering round even with an old 35mm SLR!
Oh and why no consideration of the Sigma 70-200 2.8 ? I can't fault mine, nice and sharp and quick to focus. Under hlaf the price of the L IS and closer focus distance too ( Find the 1.5m close focus a pain indoors). It's not an 'L' though...
)Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff