Canon 70-200mm f4L IS or 70-200mmf2.8L (non-IS)?

[bosstones]

Both the 70-200mm f4L IS and f2.8L (non-IS) are roughly the same pricepoint. The f2.8L IS mkI is the better part of several hundred $$$ more. I'm a little torn between the former two options. I don't typically shoot indoors, but some of you know my affinity to hand hold my dSLR in low light and night time conditions. I probably will use whichever lens to snap people at some indoor events, but most of the time it will see other use. If you had to choose between the two, which would you choose and why? Both are otherwise great lenses from the reviews I've read.

Also, please no nut-hugging of top tier lenses just because they're L, are a mkII, etc... This is not a watch thread.

[BMW F22]

I went through this before ultimately picking up the 2.8 IS. After everything I've read this is what I've gathered:

-with 2.8 you probably don't need IS if you shoot at a fast enough shutter speed.
-while IS helps it does not completely prevent motion blur. Thus IS or no IS it's not very relevant. I.E. if a subject moves it doesn't matter if you have IS or not. If you have steady hands the 2.8 is definitely the way to go.
-if you rarely shoot indoors I would go with the 4.0 IS.
-for those few times when you do shoot indoors, you could use a flash.
-if bokeh is important to you the 2.8 is the better choice.

Those are the main things I can recall off the top of my head. At the time I was shooting events/concerts as a hobby so I splurged on the 2.8 IS. Otherwise I would probably have gone with the 2.8 non-IS. The 4.0 IS is nice but again if you're shooting in the day time you could always turn up the shutter speed to not need IS.

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

I went through this before ultimately picking up the 2.8 IS. After everything I've read this is what I've gathered:

-with 2.8 you probably don't need IS if you shoot at a fast enough shutter speed.
-while IS helps it does not completely prevent motion blur. Thus IS or no IS it's not very relevant. I.E. if a subject moves it doesn't matter if you have IS or not. If you have steady hands the 2.8 is definitely the way to go.
-if you rarely shoot indoors I would go with the 4.0 IS.
-for those few times when you do shoot indoors, you could use a flash.
-if bokeh is important to you the 2.8 is the better choice.

Those are the main things I can recall off the top of my head. At the time I was shooting events/concerts as a hobby so I splurged on the 2.8 IS. Otherwise I would probably have gone with the 2.8 non-IS. The 4.0 IS is nice but again if you're shooting in the day time you could always turn up the shutter speed to not need IS.

You kind of summed up a few of the things going through my head. Curious, though, but why would you recommend the f4 IS if I rarely shoot indoors? I rarely shoot indoors, but would probably use this lens at a couple of upcoming wedding receptions. Other than that, it'll predominantly see outdoor use....quite possibly in low light or at night. I like to shoot cityscapes at night and they're 99% handheld up to shutter speeds of just over 1". That's also while keeping the ISO at 200 or below. I have an XTi so it is reasonable to go to ISO 400 and maybe 800 if I had to in order to get faster shutter speeds. I typically stay away from 1600. There's also the option of blinding people with my external flash. Perhaps one day...I'll get my butt to some track and/or race events to make us of this lens, too.

[remmib]

I feel that IS is a must have on a zoom lens.

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by remmib

I feel that IS is a must have on a zoom lens.

Good point. Incidentally, I finally deciphered your screen name. I'm a little slow. lol

My wallet is now crying.

[valdivita]

I normally shoot portraits, outdoor and indoor sports, and weddings. I recently did a wedding where no flashes at all and photographer needed to be 100% non intrusive to the ceremony. The 70mm-200mm 2.8 IS was the way to go, I was able to shoot with an ISO of 320 F2.8, shooter speed of 1 sec and 120mm, shots came out great and almost no noise distortion due to the low ISO and not bluriness either. If you don't have the full amount for the 2.8 IS, I would highly recomend to be patient, save a couple of extra bucks and pull the trigger for this one. Also a great lense for interiors (weddings specially) is the 24mm-70mm F2.8, but i still get some blured shots every now and then, I can't wait for the IS version to be released.
I hope this helps

[valdivita]

Originally Posted by valdivita

I normally shoot portraits, outdoor and indoor sports, and weddings. I recently did a wedding where no flashes at all and photographer needed to be 100% non intrusive to the ceremony. The 70mm-200mm 2.8 IS was the way to go, I was able to shoot with an ISO of 320 F2.8, shooter speed of 1 sec and 120mm, shots came out great and almost no noise distortion due to the low ISO and not bluriness either. If you don't have the full amount for the 2.8 IS, I would highly recomend to be patient, save a couple of extra bucks and pull the trigger for this one. Also a great lense for interiors (weddings specially) is the 24mm-70mm F2.8, but i still get some blured shots every now and then, I can't wait for the IS version to be released.
I hope this helps

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jackso...&ref=fbx_album

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jackso...&ref=fbx_album

[PNF]

how is it possible to have 1 sec exposure time and the shots come out great at a wedding? do people not move at all, even the slightest when you take shots?

Or, you're taking still-pic shots or something?

on a FF, ISO up to 3200 is usable IMO with f2.8 70-200 and fast enough to capture most of the shots.

Most of pros I know of usually would use

24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8 IS
85 f1.2
135 f2
16-35 f2.8 to shoot, with 2 FF (usually 2 5D2 or 1 5D2, 1 5D.)


Anyhow, If you dont shoot indoor much, 70-200 f4IS is one of the sharpest zoom lens there is, even sharper than the f2.8 at f4 out doors.

Now, if you shoot indoors, f2.8 is a must.

You dont have to have an IS, although I think it is better to have it.

Also read it some where that the IS version actually hurts the image a little bit due to the extra mechanism in it.

I'd try to find a used f2.8IS at around $1600, which is more than doable.

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by PNF

Anyhow, If you dont shoot indoor much, 70-200 f4IS is one of the sharpest zoom lens there is, even sharper than the f2.8 at f4 out doors.

Now, if you shoot indoors, f2.8 is a must.

You dont have to have an IS, although I think it is better to have it.

Also read it some where that the IS version actually hurts the image a little bit due to the extra mechanism in it.

I'd try to find a used f2.8IS at around $1600, which is more than doable.

Reportedly, the mkII flavor resolved some of the softness of the f2.8 IS mkI. It comes at an extra ~$400, though. From my google searching, the mkII has gotten some favorable reviews over the mkI.

[Mr Tonka]

I've got the 70-200 2.8IS and it's the sharpest of the 3 L lenses i have. (16-35 & 24-70) It's probably my favorite lens to shoot with. The 2.8 IS gives you a lot of options for a lot of scenarios. Most of my shooting with it is done with the IS off, but i'm usually using it outside in good light.

one of the things i didn't see mentioned is that the IS has two modes; one for both axis and one for just the vertical axis which is great to use when panning.

I would wait for the cash for the 2.8 IS. you can't go wrong. if in a year you find you don't need it, you can sell it for 90% or more of what you paid for it. if you buy it used you can probably sell it for the same price!

Good luck!

[sb335is]

i just got the MK2 70-200 2.8IS.

its beautiful.
friday night lights is now my bitch.

so if you do night time sports, or indoor basketball, then get 2.8. if not, then the F4 is great. IS isn't really necessary for sports IMO especially if youve got a monopod. and its known to vignette on some lenses.

[bosstones]

MPOWER, yeah, I noticed in some of the reviews that it has the different IS modes. That might be interesting to toy with. Do you have the mkI or mkII?

twoturboz, lol...I'm guessing you're liking the mkII. Can you post up some sample pix or links to some?

My friend the UPS man arrives Wednesday with an early x-mas present for me.

[immiketoo]

You know you want the mkII! Did you already order? I had the same dilemma when I chose and I got the II so I wouldn't ever have to worry about the wrong decision. But, I paid dearly for my peace of mind. Heres a shot from the lens.

[sb335is]

Originally Posted by bosstones

MPOWER, yeah, I noticed in some of the reviews that it has the different IS modes. That might be interesting to toy with. Do you have the mkI or mkII?

twoturboz, lol...I'm guessing you're liking the mkII. Can you post up some sample pix or links to some?

My friend the UPS man arrives Wednesday with an early x-mas present for me.

nice!

and sure, heres a non action. this is non processed.



heres a direct link to the second since it wont resize

http://yfrog.com/6rimg9797oj

I was borrowing my buddys t2i for awhile but just got a used 50d about a week and a half ago.
down side is theres a bunch of dust i need to get the sensor cleaned. up side is that there is a service center not too far from me and canon will do it for 30. considering I got it for 600 and the shutter actuations were less than 9k when I got it, I'm pretty pleased and once I get the body dusted out I'll have basically a new camera body with 3 batteries .

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by bosstones

You kind of summed up a few of the things going through my head. Curious, though, but why would you recommend the f4 IS if I rarely shoot indoors? I rarely shoot indoors, but would probably use this lens at a couple of upcoming wedding receptions. Other than that, it'll predominantly see outdoor use....quite possibly in low light or at night. I like to shoot cityscapes at night and they're 99% handheld up to shutter speeds of just over 1". That's also while keeping the ISO at 200 or below. I have an XTi so it is reasonable to go to ISO 400 and maybe 800 if I had to in order to get faster shutter speeds. I typically stay away from 1600. There's also the option of blinding people with my external flash. Perhaps one day...I'll get my butt to some track and/or race events to make us of this lens, too.

If you don't shoot indoors you don't really need 2.8. The f4.0 is a tiny bit sharper than the 2.8 and it's lighter to carry around. Thus if you don't need 2.8 the only other option you posted is the f4.0. If you handhold I would go with an IS version, especially for night time shots. I think for panning IS would definitely help.

Of course there's the option of going with the 2.8 IS but it costs quite a bit more. I couldn't decide between the two so I bit the bullet and went for the 2.8 IS. That way I don't have to wrack my brain on which one to go with. Maybe you can look for one on photography-on-the.net for sale section for a good deal on one.

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by bosstones

MPOWER, yeah, I noticed in some of the reviews that it has the different IS modes. That might be interesting to toy with. Do you have the mkI or mkII?

twoturboz, lol...I'm guessing you're liking the mkII. Can you post up some sample pix or links to some?

My friend the UPS man arrives Wednesday with an early x-mas present for me.

I'm quite sure it's an mkI as i purchased it in 2005.



Here are a few pics from it.....

This on is at 70mm





This on is at 200mm

[sb335is]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

If you don't shoot indoors you don't really need 2.8. The f4.0 is a tiny bit sharper than the 2.8 and it's lighter to carry around. Thus if you don't need 2.8 the only other option you posted is the f4.0. If you handhold I would go with an IS version, especially for night time shots. I think for panning IS would definitely help.

Of course there's the option of going with the 2.8 IS but it costs quite a bit more. I couldn't decide between the two so I bit the bullet and went for the 2.8 IS. That way I don't have to wrack my brain on which one to go with. Maybe you can look for one on photography-on-the.net for sale section for a good deal on one.

id never seen the f/4 in person till about two weeks ago.
I was very surprised when I saw how small it was, and even more surprised when I saw how sharp the photos were turning out. It's so light! and sure as hell would have been a lot easier to walk around mira mar all day instead of carrying around a 5.4 pound lens.

[vachss]

Originally Posted by twoturboz

id never seen the f/4 in person till about two weeks ago.
I was very surprised when I saw how small it was, and even more surprised when I saw how sharp the photos were turning out. It's so light! and sure as hell would have been a lot easier to walk around mira mar all day instead of carrying around a 5.4 pound lens.

5.4 lbs. ??? That's about the weight of a 300/2.8. The new 70-200/2.8IS weighs a bit over 3 lbs. Certainly not a lightweight, but not nearly at the supertele range.

[sb335is]

Originally Posted by vachss

5.4 lbs. ??? That's about the weight of a 300/2.8. The new 70-200/2.8IS weighs a bit over 3 lbs. Certainly not a lightweight, but not nearly at the supertele range.

Hmm. Well, amazon lists it at 5.4 lbs item weight and 6lbs shipping weight.
I haven't put mine on a scale though....

[Trijicon]

Get the 2.8 and a CF tripod or monopod.

[sb335is]

Originally Posted by Trijicon

Get the 2.8 and a CF tripod or monopod.

Is that really necessary?
I guess its nice if you've got the cash. Last year I got to use a nice manfrotto monopod with the hand adjustable lever.

This year I'm using my buddys monopod that came out of his tripod center. Its fixed once you lock the height but it does the job. Blew all my money on this lens and camera body.... Being amateur sucks. I need to start getting paid. I had to sell my xbox and a bunch of other junk to cover the body and I've got to sell the MKII at the end of the year if I don't start getting some cash flow.

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by twoturboz

Is that really necessary?
I guess its nice if you've got the cash. Last year I got to use a nice manfrotto monopod with the hand adjustable lever.

This year I'm using my buddys monopod that came out of his tripod center. Its fixed once you lock the height but it does the job. Blew all my money on this lens and camera body.... Being amateur sucks. I need to start getting paid. I had to sell my xbox and a bunch of other junk to cover the body and I've got to sell the MKII at the end of the year if I don't start getting some cash flow.

Really? I just sold my soul and a few pints of blood. No way could I part with my PS3. So....signature required on the package so the box is sitting at UPS........and they won't let me pick it up tonight for some reason since it is past 1900. Perhaps I will sneak out during lunch tomorrow to get it...provided they pull it from the truck like they're supposed to so it doesn't go back out for delivery again while I'm at work. Either way...hell of a turnaround time from B&H.