Canon 70-200 L Glass - advice please

[stevelc]

Hi Gang

Well time to drive in the L glass deep end..

I am after pro's and con's of

70 - 200 f2.8L
70 - 200 F2.8L with IS
70 - 200 F4 L
70 - 200 F4 L with IS

what I shoot and the rest of my kit.
I am shooting models - Nudes thru to Fashion in both a studio and on location. Plus the odd landscape and some sports - Surf / motor etc.. But Glamour is where I am headed.

Kit 30D, 300D as Back Up,
Lens - a few kits lens, Sigma 50-500 apo and soon a canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Any advice would be great

[Ephemeral]

The IS helps when you are shooting at 200mm end. Granted it's not essential at 200mm, compared to say a 400mm lens. You can live without it. I have shaky hands (I used to have poor camera holding technique too :P) which IS also helps.

IS doesn't help you to stop motion. So it doesn't make taking fast action, like sports, any better than non IS.

Optically there isn't a huge difference between the F2.8 and F4.0.

[Aidenswarrior]

well if you have the money for the 2.8 IS you may as well get it. IS cant hurt (unless shooting sports and fast things of course but you just turn it off). I have the F4 and sometimes i get annoyed and how light it has to be to get a clear shot, i would think the 2.8 would be nicer for lower lit situations.

[Collin85]

If you shoot low-light action shots, general action shots where subjects are to be emphasized and freezed or shots where bokeh is a biggie, f/2.8 non-IS might be the go.

If you shoot low-light still subject shots, and prefer something lighter to travel with, f/4 IS might be the go.

If you'll honestly do alot of both, f/2.8 IS might be the way to go!

If you do mainly shooting in good lighting without any particular need for a very low level depth of field, the vanilla f/4 non-IS might be the way to go.

Collin

[bbc14f]

In the studio there is not going to be a whole lot of difference, especially if you are using flash. With sports or shooting with low ambient light situations I'm always wishing I had the extra stops. I really love my f4 non IS its pretty sharp for a zoom but where it gets me is with the colour especially in the studio. It has a certain kind of realistic soft saturation. I've been tempted many times to upgrade to the 2.8 but I can't let go of the f4, and can't justify owning both. :D

[abigailandsam]

The 70-200 f2.8L IS will astound you with sharp, beautiful photos, even in low light. Zooms just don't get any better than this.

[runninmann]

....
I am shooting models - Nudes thru to Fashion in both a studio and on location. Plus the odd landscape and some sports - Surf / motor etc.. But Glamour is where I am headed.

Kit 30D, 300D as Back Up,
Lens - a few kits lens, Sigma 50-500 apo and soon a canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Any advice would be greatIs the 70-200 the best choice for someone with this goal?

[stupot]

If you're looking to save some money i don't see a problem with getting a 70-200 f/4 non IS for sstudio work. you're likely to be stopping down anyway and i find my f/4 insanely sharp wide open. i also like its weight.

edit: for sports etc im sure its great in good light, though i haven't used it for that purpose. i do use it for landscape/nature shots though and its great. also has quite a nice min focusing distance, good for close-ups.