Canon Lenses

[Fastchas]

OK, so I'm thinking of kicking on a bit with my hobby. I have a Canon 60D and a 18-135 lens which is quite good. I'm thinking of splashing out (what I would call serious money!) for a Canon 70-200 F4 lens (the white one). I've noticed a big difference in price of used lenses between the IS and the non-IS, probably £2-300.
Is the non-IS still worth putting your money on? I don't think I'll be able to spend £600 on the IS lens! Could I get over the IS issue by 1 or 2 stops?
Also thinking of the 24-70mm L as well. Would these two lenses be all I'd need in the real world?
My main pics are taken indoors with forages into landscape, not many action shots but only because of no opportunities yet.

[markmullen]

IS version is sharper and has weather sealing, in addition to the IS.

A 70-200 and 24-70 f2.8 is a good combo though I'd probably look for a 70-200 f2.8 rather than f4

[Fastchas]

Agreed but I'd have to sell my motorbike to buy it! That's why I thinking of the F4.
Is the non-IS still good enough though?

[SMB]

Fastchas said:

Agreed but I'd have to sell my motorbike to buy it! That's why I thinking of the F4.
Is the non-IS still good enough though?

If isn't a priority for you the f4 non is is still a good sharp lens.

[DibblyDobbler]

What are you going to be shooting with it? 70-200 is a bit of a funny focal length on a crop sensor - ie quite long but not long enough for a lot of things.

[markmullen]

Fastchas said:

Agreed but I'd have to sell my motorbike to buy it! That's why I thinking of the F4.
Is the non-IS still good enough though?

It's still a good lens, yes.

[jonny33]

I bought the 70-200 F4 non-IS lens last year for a trip to Japan. It is a cracking lens, sharp at any distance and surprisingly lite weight as well. I had no issue carrying it around all day on the body. The only drawbacks are the low light performance isn't the best so if you want to shoot indoors the F2.8 would be better and as stated above the focal range is odd on a crop sensor. I had to purchase a 1.4x tele converter to gain extra length when at air shows as 200mm was just a tiny bit too short.

[m1dg3]

Don't discount the non-L 70-300 IS. Image quality is superb, the IS works brilliantly and it's less than £300. Obviously the build quality is nothing like an L but then neither's the price. As a hobbyist I'd need a very good reason not to choose this lens.

[Tony1963]

If indoors and landscape are your priorities, just get the 24-70 for now, as that'll cover most opportunities.
For action shots, I turn the IS off on my 70-200 f2.8 anyway, as I'm usually photographing moving aircraft or cars. So, see how you go with the 24-70, think a bit more about whether you really need a longer lens. Maybe just get a prime lens and use your feet?

[LC2]

The 24-70L Mk1 & Mk2 are very good lenses, but they are designed for full frame rather than crop. They will obviously work on a crop, but you're not getting the best out of them.
Also, 24mm on a crop is quite long, you may rue the missing few mms on the wide end.
The sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is supposed to be very good though.
Sigma have just announced a 50-100 f/1.8 art too. A bit early for many reviews though.

Of course, it really depends on what you intend to do and you've not mentioned that.

[Tony1963]

Damn. Forgot about the crop thing!

A MkI Tokina 11-16mm gives great results. I had one on my 40D til we were burgled. It even worked on my 5DIII at 16mm! The MkI must be very cheap used now, and would leave cash for another lens, maybe.

[RobDickinson]

Unless you are going full frame the 24-70 is a waste, too much glass not wide enough.

Far better off with a 17-55f2.8 is, or perhaps sigma's 18-35f2.0

The Canon 70-200 f4 is awesome but as said an odd length on a crop body and limited indoor or landscape use

[Fastchas]

Thanks for the replies. I never think about the crop thing!
Length isn't really an issue to me, but a good image is. I just thought the L would be better with F4 through the zoom.
Saw a F2.8 offered for £600 this week!

Edited by Fastchas on Monday 29th February 10:13

[Craikeybaby]

Fist of all I'd concur with the advice that 24-70 isn't ideal on a cropped sensor - I'd suggest the 17-55f2.8.

I have the non-IS 70-200f2.8L, but regularly use the non-IS f4 version as my Dad has it and it is considerably lighter than my lens. I have used it for some landscape shots, but on full frame. 70mm would be suitable for indoor head and shoulder portraits, but you would be better off with a fast prime.

[bigbob77]

The non-IS 70-200L F4 was my first 'L' lens. Used it with my 50D for everything from portraits to air-shows.
Loved it then and still love it now on my 6D. Super-fast focus and very sharp wide open.

Obviously if you compare it to even better lenses (like many on this thread are doing) then they will be better... and more expensive! Don't take that as criticism though - for the price I don't think you can beat it.

I would like a 2.8, but personally wouldn't pay extra for the F4 IS. I don't know about the 60D, but the high-ISO ability of the 6D is so good that there's no need for IS unless you really like shooting stationary items in the pitch-black without a tripod.

And "are the 24-70 F4 and 70-200 F4 the only lenses I need?" - 24mm on a crop body is too long if that's the widest you have. On full-frame for me the range between 24 and 200 covers 99% of what I need, but not on crop.

Edited by bigbob77 on Monday 29th February 14:44

[Fastchas]

bigbob77 said:

The non-IS 70-200L F4 was my first 'L' lens. Used it with my 50D for everything from portraits to air-shows.
Loved it then and still love it now on my 6D. Super-fast focus and very sharp wide open.

Obviously if you compare it to even better lenses (like many on this thread are doing) then they will be better... and more expensive! Don't take that as criticism though - for the price I don't think you can beat it.

I would like a 2.8, but personally wouldn't pay extra for the F4 IS. I don't know about the 60D, but the high-ISO ability of the 6D is so good that there's no need for IS unless you really like shooting stationary items in the pitch-black without a tripod.

And "are the 24-70 F4 and 70-200 F4 the only lenses I need?" - 24mm on a crop body is too long if that's the widest you have. On full-frame for me the range between 24 and 200 covers 99% of what I need, but not on crop.

Edited by bigbob77 on Monday 29th February 14:44

This is very useful to me (as a relative starter!). Thank you.

[DibblyDobbler]

I had the 70-200 non-IS for a while and it is a great lens in its own right (if not quite as good/expensive as the IS version) but it just wasn't a focal length I used a lot - ie too long for landscapes and too short for wildlife. But if it's a focal length you use then I would say go for it

[prolix]

With a crop sensor and a 17-55 f2.8 IS and a 70-200 f4 IS (switching between IS modes as appropriate), you can do anything - happy-snapping, architecture, portraits, wildlife, landscape, sport,... I've used this combination for several years, on a 40D (which expired late 2014 after tens of thousands of shots) and now a 7DII (which is utterly brilliant, BTW). Neither lens is light compared with kit lenses, but they are well-balanced on semi-pro bodies, and I've never regretted getting the 70-200 f4 rather than the vastly heavier f2.8; if I've needed to be below f4 the 17-55 has been the lens to use anyway. I also have a 10-22 mm f3.5-4.5 which is great in confined spaces, and occasionally for panoramas, but I use it so seldom cf the 17-55 that I sometimes wonder why I bother to lug it around...

[TheBlondeFella]

Take a look at the DXO website. They will tell you the best performing lens to use with your model of camera. I never thought I'd say it but alternative manufacturers to Canon have come an awful long way over recent years

[alspeed]

The 70-200L 2.8 IS is one of my favourite lenses, but its a heavy old lump, the F4 version is cheaper and will be a lot more friendly to carry around.
Not really sure IS is that much of a deal breaker really, you can get away with bumping up the ISO so much more on the latest bodies to keep the shutter speed high enough to eliminate camera shake.