Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #1
lsquare
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,785
Default How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

I think some people here have gears specifically for travelling and some for serious work when they're home. For travelling, a nice and light telephoto lens is pretty much necessary. Given the weight of the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II, the 70-200mm f/4 L IS makes a nice alternative. It does seem a bit overblown to have two very similar lens for different purposes. I'm just wondering how many of you have such a setup and if not, would any of you consider it?
lsquare is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #2
mike cabilangan
Senior Member
 
mike cabilangan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Metro Manila
Posts: 1,358
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

good question (want to see if many people keep both as well)
__________________
camera bag reviews

flickr gearLust
mike cabilangan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #3
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: CT
Posts: 8,814
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

I have both. I really only use the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for weddings and paid work - in fact, if I stopped doing weddings tomorrow, I'd sell it. The 70-200 f/4 IS has fantastic IQ, is fairly lightweight and compact, and really a pleasure to use. Like you say, the f/2.8 is big and heavy, and IMO a real commitment to carry around for casual use.

For me, the physical characteristic of these lenses are different enough to justify having both - unlike have both a 24-70 + 24-105, or a 16-35 + 17-40. Here's a side by side comparison:

timnosenzo is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #4
lsquare
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,785
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timnosenzo View Post
I have both. I really only use the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II for weddings and paid work - in fact, if I stopped doing weddings tomorrow, I'd sell it. The 70-200 f/4 IS has fantastic IQ, is fairly lightweight and compact, and really a pleasure to use. Like you say, the f/2.8 is big and heavy, and IMO a real commitment to carry around for casual use.

For me, the physical characteristic of these lenses are different enough to justify having both - unlike have both a 24-70 + 24-105, or a 16-35 + 17-40. Here's a side by side comparison:

Thanks for the comparison photos!

For travelling, I was thinking of using both the 17-40mm f4/L and 70-200 f/4 L IS. I'll also add a Panasonic GF1 with a 20mm f/1.7 lens for low light. This would be my ideal travel setup.

I wonder how many people actually do this though. Obviously it's going to cost money, but since I don't make money from photography, it's not really an issue for me. It's just all for fun, but there's still the practical part in which I have to deal with. Is it practical and whether it's a waste of money or not even though it'll have its uses.
lsquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #5
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: CT
Posts: 8,814
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lsquare View Post
I wonder how many people actually do this though.
Probably not many, but if it works for you then that is all that is important.
timnosenzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #6
lsquare
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,785
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timnosenzo View Post
Probably not many, but if it works for you then that is all that is important.
Was your reason for getting both the same as mine?
lsquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #7
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: CT
Posts: 8,814
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lsquare View Post
Was your reason for getting both the same as mine?
I had the f/4 IS for a while before adding the f/2.8. I added the f/2.8 IS because after shooting a few weddings I felt like having a fast tele zoom would be helpful for ceremonies where space is tight, or where I can't move around (I typically use fixed lenses for everything). However, I like the f/4 IS so much for general travel/hiking/landscape photography that I didn't want to sell it to get the f/2.8, so I didn't. But for me, the f/2.8 serves a very specific purpose and it typically won't leave the house unless I know that I'll need it.
timnosenzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #8
lsquare
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,785
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by timnosenzo View Post
I had the f/4 IS for a while before adding the f/2.8. I added the f/2.8 IS because after shooting a few weddings I felt like having a fast tele zoom would be helpful for ceremonies where space is tight, or where I can't move around (I typically use fixed lenses for everything). However, I like the f/4 IS so much for general travel/hiking/landscape photography that I didn't want to sell it to get the f/2.8, so I didn't. But for me, the f/2.8 serves a very specific purpose and it typically won't leave the house unless I know that I'll need it.
That's exactly how I would feel if I were you.
lsquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #9
umphotography
Cream of the Crop
 
umphotography's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: minnesota
Posts: 8,011
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

i had both and swaped the 70-200 f/4 is for a 35L. The 70-200 f/2.8(is) is my favorite lens and its on my cameras all the time. but it is a pain in the but to carry around all day. grabbed a 70-200 f/4 and i use it a lot.
__________________
Mike
www.umphotography.com
GEAR LIST
Facebook
umphotography is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #10
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
 
bohdank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 14,059
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

My boss is in town and is seriously thinking of selling his 70-200 (Nikon). The weight, size is just a pain for a walk around or travel and he's tired of it.

I told him I went Canon for 2 reasons. One of them was the 70-200 f4 IS (my first lens).

My sentiments are as from the couple of wedding shooters above. Still, it works fine for me shooting concerts (my main use for this lens) so I have never missed not having 2.8 in this range of zoom.
__________________
Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer
Flickr
bohdank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #11
TxDiver
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 245
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

The 2.8 is fine for even hiking I think, but then again I am in the gym for 1 hour most days of the week (and no I am not some young 20 something year old). Last summer I hiked all over Colorado with it, along with the 16-35.
TxDiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #12
TxDiver
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 245
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TxDiver View Post
The 2.8 is fine for even hiking I think, but then again I am in the gym for 1 hour most days of the week (and no I am not some young 20 something year old). Last summer I hiked all over Colorado with it, along with the 16-35.
Actually, it was my 100-400 that I had with me with the 16-35...but the weight is similar and my point is that if someone has the 2.8 for certain needs, then it is also reasonable to use it when the 4 would suffice, just to save by not buying multiple zooms of the same range.
TxDiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #13
spkerer
Member
 
spkerer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Leesburg, VA USA
Posts: 945
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

I had the f/4 IS for a while and then picked up the f/2.8 IS II when it came out. I haven't used the f/4 since about a week after getting the f/2.8 IS II. I'm not sure what I'll do with it at this point, but its sitting around bored at home.
__________________
C&C Always welcome! Gear List
"Photo 601" Leesburg Volunteer Fire Company, Leesburg, Virginia
Fire photos at
http://photos.kusterers.net/fire
spkerer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #14
taxsux
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 392
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

I did a Coogee - Bondi hike, Sydney people know this is a task. I had the 7-2 2.8 IS and 24-70. But like spkerer, I'm a gym junkie as well.
taxsux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of July 2010 (Tue)   #15
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
 
bohdank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 14,059
Default Re: How many of you have both the Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II?

Here we go, again

It's not a 100 lb bag of cement but attached to a camera body and having to raise/lower it 200 times, while manuevering does enter your consciousness after awhile. Do this for a few days in a row and you start thinking of a suitable replacement.

Maybe it doesn't bother you and you are willing to put up with it but I don't subscribe to the suffereing artist theory.

Add the fact that you may have a couple of additional lenses along with you, which also may be on the heavy side... it adds up.

In a backpack.... who cares.

With the new MKII it did enter my mind to pick one up, then I thought about what/where I was shooting the last week, almost daily, for 4 hrs/day... dragging a 70-200 f2.8 along with a 300 f4IS and a mid range zoom quickly vanquished that idea from my mind especially since it would not have improved my keeper rate one bit.

Each to their own.
__________________
Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer
Flickr
bohdank is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
canon 70-200mm f4 nonIS slower at 200mm? blueroioq Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 7 12th of March 2010 (Fri) 10:10
Sigma COMPACT HYPERZOOM 28-200mm F3.5-5.6 or CANON EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM bijou Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 5 13th of September 2009 (Sun) 19:46
sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 vs Canon 70-200mm f/4 (my short experie vvizard Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 20 29th of October 2008 (Wed) 03:57
Need a third party lens for Canon 30D, Sigma 18-200mm or Tamron 18-200mm? hackzai Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 3 2nd of October 2006 (Mon) 04:00
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L - Sigma 18-200mm shoot-out ! GAELICSTORM7 Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 16 4th of May 2006 (Thu) 18:08


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.