My first L lens, what should it be:70-200 2.8L or 70-200 2.8L IS

[Treat me like a tourist]

I think the time has come for me to buy a 70-200, it was always going to be my first L, i thought having read the posts on here that it would be wise to skip the F4 version as people tend to sell it in the first year or so and upgrade to the 2.8 or 2.8IS, so i thought i would save a little more until i could afford the 2.8.
Now i can afford the 2.8 i find myself questioning whether i should plump for the IS. The fact that you all appear to own one has made me jealous, argh!!!

Now i know alot of you out there are wedding photographers, and the IS is part of the holy trinity, but if you rarely shoot indoors and if you have a 580ex to compensate being indoors, and you dont shoot weddings, is the £300 premium IS function really worth it? Does that make sense???

If you own the IS version, what occasions has the IS been worth its weight in gold? I would be grateful of any scenarios etc as to when you have benefitted from having this feature. O and sample images would help.
Do you always shoot with the IS switched on?

Any reply would be fantastic, even if its, stop wining the 2.8 is brilliant anyway!

Thanks guys.

[kster]

If the IS version is in your budget, get it. It's really nice to have when shutter speeds start to drop.

I use the lens often for landscape and don't like lugging a tripod everywhere. With IS, the images still come out very sharp. Without IS, it would be much more difficult to handhold.

Sample pic from Yosemite I took last Saturday with the 70-200IS:
http://photos.imageevent.com/kster/tiogapass/img_0633.jpg

[calicokat]

I own the IS version and it helps me out with weddings and low light sporting events. I have been succesful at hand-holding down to 1/8th of a second. See below

http://calicokat.smugmug.com/photos/71405282-M.jpg

this is at F/2.8, 1/8th, ISO 400 in Manual Mode at 200mm.

[Treat me like a tourist]

Wow look at that 2 people instantly urging me to spend more money. LOL
Thanks, any more comments to come?
How good is the IS function, i mean how low light are we talking here?
See the non IS i have seen for £700 in hong kong, but the IS is £1000, so i figure if i am to buy this its now when its £300 extra not an extra£1000 in a years time.
Also has anyone bought a lens from onestop digital before, ihave bought a flashgun but i think a lens is a more delicate purchase, especially given the number of miles that it will cover being delivered.
Thanks again guys.

[basroil]

low light as in the light of a torch if you look at the above picture. with the IS, i've done nighttime candids of people 30 feet from a lightpost. if that's what you like to do, go for it. IS is worth it's weight in gold, maybe even worth more than it's weight in gold, you need to check the gold futures to be sure though ;)

[calicokat]

the fire dancing shot is very low light, and taking it at 1/8th would not be possible and sharp without IS

[dontblink]

The IS seems useful to me. I would say it improves at least 25% of my shots, the rest are daylight / sports shots that have a fast enough shutter speed not to matter.

[Treat me like a tourist]

You guys are killing me, thats an awesome shot and i have to confess that sort of capture is on my to do list i have messed around with similar things already, i know a fire dancer and she has offered to pose, hmmmm.
I was hoping someone with out an IS would have popped up but its the faithful IS crowd that are here lol.
Does anyone have any shots with and without IS or could they for me(without selling me the thing lol)- unbiased shots perhaps lol.
I guess that i can afford the IS, i did the same when i bought my 20d i originally went in for the 350d. It will just mean that i will have to wait that big longer for the 16-35L, but i dont need that if i have the 70-200IS to play with in the dark doi guys?

[stevefossimages]

My go-to lens for wildlife is the 100-400L f4.5-5.6 IS, a far slower lens than you're looking at. For me, IS has been a total lifesaver. I've shot down to 1/30 with this lens with great success because of it, and the L zoom you're buying is, of course, much faster. General rule is, three full stops are gained through IS, and if you put it with a monopod, you've really got a stable system there. I'd be the whole 300 quid that, once you use IS, you're going to wonder how you did without it all this time.

[Petelebon]

As i said previously, if you consider spending that much money on a top end lens, then don't settle short and go all the way for the 70-200 f2.8 IS. Or else don't spend that much money and settle for the 70-200 4L or 70-300IS or Sigma 70-200 f2.8.

Going for the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS is like buying a top end Mercedes or Porsche and buying cheap Sears or Wal Mart brand tires...

[Treat me like a tourist]

Ok guys ok your wearing me down. Steve that is so weird i actually did look at the 100-400LIS, but i thought i would get more use out of the 70-200 over the winter. I would like to start shoot birds soon (thats pics not bullets for all you US rifle owners), lol. I dont think i would get many pics over winter, most of our birds go on holiday(migrate) well the pretty ones do atleast. Have you tried an extender on 100-400, does it degrade the pic quality?

One more q for all you lucky L owners, how do you find the range on a crop body? Thanks again.

[Petelebon]

You can add an extender to 70-200IS. and such lens (without the extender) will assurely be a better use overall. As matter of fact it's such a terrific portrait lens for inside and outside. a lot of pros use this lens, such as Playboy photographers (for magazine and channel). If i could afford it, i would buy it. I settle now for the 70-300IS which is also very good, but far less bright (not f2.8).

[stevefossimages]

The 1.4 TC degrades IQ only very slightly, the 2 TC a good bit more. Unless you're shooting a "1" series body with the 100-400L, you won't be able to autofocus when using a Canon TC unless you tape off a couple of the pins (not sure which ones) to spoof the camera. I sold my 1.4 because, with the 20D, I can't autofocus with that lens and TC, and even if you tape the pins it focuses a lot more slowly, and for my nature work, slow focus can be VERY bad. The 20D will only autofocus with a Canon TC on lenses that open to f2.8 or wider, so you'll maintain autofocus capabilities if you put a TC on the lens you're buying.

If you shoot birds, you're definitely going to want 400mm at least. Since you'll already have zoom flexibility up to nearly 300mm (I'm assuming you're going to pick up a 1.4 TC for that 70-200; most do, and it's a great combo), you might look at the very affordable and sharp prime 400L f5.6, not the 100-400. It's no faster than the 100-400L IS at 400, but it is a prime, so it's a tad sharper (I like the sharpness fine on my 100-400, but primes are always sharper). You'll definitely need a good tripod with the 400, because it's not an IS lens, but at a bit over $1,000 U.S., it's the best value for a 400mm L prime. If you're comfortable with manual focus or you tape those pins, you can add that 1.4, though you'll lose a stop and be stuck at f8 for max aperature.

I believe in Canon TCs, but I think, someone correct me if I'm wrong, that Tamron TCs will allow the non "1" series bodies to use autofocus on slower lenses, because there's some data that non Canon TCs don't transmit to and from the body.

I'm not sure what you mean by "how do you find the range on a crop body." You find the apparent focal length by multiplying the lens focal length by 1.6 for the 20D, if that's what you mean. So the 70-200 would convert to roughly a 110-320mm. The 100-400mm converts to a 160-640mm, and that's often barely adequate for bird photography. If you take your soon-to-be owned 70-200, add the 1.4 TC and get to about 100-280mm, then multiply by 1.6, you get about 160-450mm.

[Treat me like a tourist]

OK thanks, i think out of greed i would go for the 2x converter, its the same money, and i understand they have updated the 2x now so the impact is less than its predecessor.
Woo i am now a normal member of this forum, no more junior. lol i need help.
Thanks for the advice, time to do some sums. If anyone else would like to comment please feel free to do so.

[Lightstream]

Just go for it. The 70-200 is a f/2.8 with IS zoom, and those two criteria in my opinion make it the ULTIMATE low light zoom. You can't get any better than that in a zoom. The 17-55 f/2.8 IS is immensely significant for exactly the same reason. Damn it, I wish I had the money to own either.....

[genewch]

For me the IS is like a first class seat. If you have money, the IS gives you excellent service. If you are on a budget, the non-IS still carries you to the destination, but without the extra room of the seat and fine food. A monopod is an alternative or partial solution, and a supplement. I said it's a partial solution because you may not always have a monopod in your bag. A supplement means it shares the weight of the lens and gives stability.

[ChopstickHero]

I own the IS version and it helps me out with weddings and low light sporting events. I have been succesful at hand-holding down to 1/8th of a second. See below

http://calicokat.smugmug.com/photos/71405282-M.jpg

this is at F/2.8, 1/8th, ISO 400 in Manual Mode at 200mm.

wow, cool picture!

[grego]

My first real lens was a 70-200 IS. I borrowed money from a friend to get it!! Can't go wrong with the lens, but don't kill yourself if your budget doesn't allow. If you have to, buy the non IS and sell later. These lens have high re-sale values

[Treat me like a tourist]

Ok i am going for it, hope your all happy when i am starving lol!!!
This now leads me to ask a new question to you all who have been so helpful so far.
Those of you who have the 70-200 F2.8L IS, what filters do you use to protect the front element, that is if you dare to take it outside.
Thanks, A.

[malla1962]

IS all the way if you can aford it.:D:D:D

[Jon]

I use B+W MRC or Hoya HMC/S-HMC UVs on all my lenses that will accept front filters. Branches and dog noses are no respecters of lens hoods. Nor is air show smoke or uncaught FOD in prop wash.

[XMX]

Go for broke and get the IS. It's only money. You can die with your camera equipment but not your money!

[Treat me like a tourist]

Well i did it i oredered it this morning, i cant believe i am actually spending this much money on a lens, so come on whos proud of me???? lol

XMX interesting thought, i just thought what the hell , soon enough women will be after my money, better spend it while its still there lol, only joking ladies!!

Ok so it should arrive tmrw am or Monday, so guys tell me what i should look for in terms of defects, you know typical doomsdayscenrario that its faulty etc lol

Isnt it typical we spend so much on equipment that we think will be the best, then once we have it, we spend hours trying to find fault with it!! lol

THanks so much for help guys, please feel free to give more, o and i am ordering B&W filters tmrw, i am going to buy a circular polariser and a uv filter, any other recommendations??

Jon i heard smoke damages lens, but you know i never thought twice about jet exhausts, i am a big fan of airshows, i will remember that tip!

Thanks again, A.

[grego]

Well congratulations, you won't regret your purchase. I think you are getting the IS version. Good job, but even if you got the non IS you wouldnt' regret it. If you are going to drop some money this is one lens to do it on.

[momentz]

Congrats, you're going to enjoy it :)

[zakabog]

As i said previously, if you consider spending that much money on a top end lens, then don't settle short and go all the way for the 70-200 f2.8 IS. Or else don't spend that much money and settle for the 70-200 4L or 70-300IS or Sigma 70-200 f2.8.

Going for the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS is like buying a top end Mercedes or Porsche and buying cheap Sears or Wal Mart brand tires...

Going for the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS is more like buying a top end Mercedes or Porsche and not getting traction control.

I was going to come on as a non-IS owner but you've already ordered the camera. Oh well, I'll just post this for anyone else wondering about IS or non-IS heh.

http://74.68.23.207/~banshee/gallery/good/Building.jpg

That's from a boat (staten island ferry into manhattan), ISO 1600, 1/30th of a second hand held (athough a tripod on a boat wouldn't help much at all.)

http://74.68.23.207/~banshee/gallery/good/.cache/Seagull.jpg-800.jpg

That's from the same boat, much higher shutter speed though (1/500) and a lower ISO.

It's an awesome lens IS or non-IS, and it all depends on what you want to use it for. I bought the non-IS 70-200 because I got a great price on one that was used and I was on a limited budget, and I knew I wanted the 2.8 over the 4. Now I have much more money for camera gear (just bought a 5D and a 16-35 2.8L :-D), and if I didn't have a 70-200 I'd still end up buying the non-IS and I would spend the money I saved on accessories (larger CF card, flash, reflector's, whatever.)

[murtaugh]

ok this is kinda off subject and i feel kinda dumb but i can't figure out how to post a topic of my own, so if i could get a little help it would be great

[Treat me like a tourist]

Lol its ok, go to the main menu pick a forum category, then on the top bar just above all the different posts it should say start new topic, it will be on the left side.

O yes it is the 70-200 2.8LIS i cant believe i am doing it, well i did think that saving on the non is could help with another lens, but my dad getting the 5d and the 16-35 so we can now share gear, which is fantastic, hes a convert from nikon, i have converted my first lol woo!!!
do i get a prize for this.
I cant wait for this lens to arrive i will be so stressed if i have to wait till monday,
Any uk people out there?? where do you source BW filters from.
Thanks guys,A.

[grego]

It's an awesome lens IS or non-IS, and it all depends on what you want to use it for. I bought the non-IS 70-200 because I got a great price on one that was used and I was on a limited budget, and I knew I wanted the 2.8 over the 4. Now I have much more money for camera gear (just bought a 5D and a 16-35 2.8L :-D), and if I didn't have a 70-200 I'd still end up buying the non-IS and I would spend the money I saved on accessories (larger CF card, flash, reflector's, whatever.)

Even then you can always re-sell and make most money back and upgrade if the need ever arises.

[FSALESI]

I have the F4 and as soon as I save enough I will get the NON-IS. Then start saving for the IS. The 10-15% I lose as part of selling through here is well worth having one of these lenses to actually use, rather than dream about. Also, if you buy/sell used then you will probably break even.

[zakabog]

Even then you can always re-sell and make most money back and upgrade if the need ever arises.

I have the F4 and as soon as I save enough I will get the NON-IS. Then start saving for the IS. The 10-15% I lose as part of selling through here is well worth having one of these lenses to actually use, rather than dream about. Also, if you buy/sell used then you will probably break even.

Exactly! I bought the lens used, I could sell it for very close to what I paid for it, and whatever the difference is (between the bought price and the sold price) can just be treated as a "rental" fee hehe. If I felt that I'd need the IS soon I'd go sell my non-IS and upgrade. I'd lose $100 at most, plus I'd still have all those shots I took with the non-IS.

[Treat me like a tourist]

its here its here its here wooooo its here!!
Spent first 20 minutes checking for scratches lol,lets see if it works, o no its raining i cannot possibly take it oustide in to the harsh world! it must stay indoors forever lol.
hehe
Thank you for all your kind words guys, your advice has been fantastic, your encouragement has made me spend more money but hey its these little pushes that makes our photography improve lol. And anyway who needs a carbon fibre tripod when you have IS!!!
CalicoKat thanks for your picture, that convinced me to go for it!!

Thanks again guys!
A.