Want the 70-200mm II but can't justify the cost?

So are they the same or not!? lol

My understanding was that the f/2.8 IS MK I had the standard 3-stop IS which control shake in the horizontal and vertical axis only, that the f/4 IS had a similar system, but could correct for up to 4 stops, and the f/2.8 IS MK II had an even newer system (same as in the 100mm f/2.8 L macro) which was a 4-stop correction in all three axis.

Canon used to call this "hybrid image stabilisation" on the 100L, and I seem to recall hearing this was what they put in the 70-200 MK II.

I've been debating this exact problem for the last month or so.

I finally went into my local camera shop and played around with both. I also brought my 2 yr old daughter with me. I can safely say the f/4 will be the way for me now. I am not a professional photographer by any means, and I can't see myself 'going for a walk' with the wife and kids and dragging the 2.8 along. I also have a hard time picturing myself climbing the monkey bars with it to go get one of the kids, or having to put down my $2500 lens in dirt (the $1200 f/4 will be bad enough.)

The $1000+ difference also helps a ton, allows me a lot of flexibility with upgrading a body, or buying another lens or two.

I wonder frequently when I read the posts that say you're going to regret not getting the 2.8, is this coming from a professional photographer, or a amateur guy/girl who loves photography and just wants to shoot great pics of their kids/family/dog/cat and a few landscapes. Cause I gotta tell you, it sometimes comes across as a little elitist.

Snydremark wrote in post #10932595
Where does this info come from, though.

Canon USA website - http://www.usa.canon.c​om …p/ef_70_200mm_f​_4l_is_usm
Quote (from f/4 IS page):
The optical Image Stabilization in the new EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM lens provides up to an incredible four stops of shake correction-a first for Canon IS lenses.

Quote (from f/2.8 MK2 IS page):
It features a next-generation Optical Image Stabilizer, providing up to 4 stops of correction at all focal lengths

Quote (from f/2.8 IS MK1 page):
Incorporating Canon’s second generation Image Stabilization technology, this telephoto zoom responds in as little as 0.5 seconds, while providing up to three stops of correction for camera shake.

nemesis47 wrote in post #10934466
Canon USA website - http://www.usa.canon.c​om …p/ef_70_200mm_f​_4l_is_usm
Quote (from f/4 IS page):
The optical Image Stabilization in the new EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM lens provides up to an incredible four stops of shake correction-a first for Canon IS lenses.

Quote (from f/2.8 MK2 IS page):
It features a next-generation Optical Image Stabilizer, providing up to 4 stops of correction at all focal lengths

Quote (from f/2.8 IS MK1 page):
Incorporating Canon’s second generation Image Stabilization technology, this telephoto zoom responds in as little as 0.5 seconds, while providing up to three stops of correction for camera shake.

And the rep I spoke to said that both the f/4 and the MkII have 4 stop IS, but the system in the MkII was freshly built for that purpose. So, while they both offer 4 stops, the MkII's system is newer.

You've been given some very good info in this thread so go forward with the knowledge that you've made an educated purchase.

The bottom line is this: Buy the best tool for the job, enjoy the results and don't look back.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10923147
I know two top aviation shooters who feel good enough about the MkII that they're willing to shoot air to air sessions without a gyro.

Any names Jay?

I am considering to buy this lens... actually, I'm almost there. I shot Air to Air with my f/4L IS without a gyro and it is AMAZING already!

NicolasRubio wrote in post #10935048
Any names Jay?

I am considering to buy this lens... actually, I'm almost there. I shot Air to Air with my f/4L IS without a gyro and it is AMAZING already!

Jim K at EAA and Jim Wilson in Texas.

Kooper wrote in post #10933844
So are they the same or not!? lol

Well I can confirm the IS on the f4 is very loud but the 2.8mk2 is nearly silent .

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10935011
You've been given some very good info in this thread so go forward with the knowledge that you've made an educated purchase.

The bottom line is this: Buy the best tool for the job, enjoy the results and don't look back.

Yes I'm very appreciative of the information. Thinking I might go with the F4 IS because of the weight factor, I would be carrying around the lens for a good while out in the wild. I really don't think the 2.8 is necessary for what I'm trying to achieve as I'd be shooting in daylight most of the time anyway.

So weight and speed requirements help me to lean towards the F4. As much as I'd love the 2.8, it seems more like a premium I don't really need, and if I find myself needing it, I can upgrade at that time.

With the cash I save by going with the F4 I can upgrade to a 7D as well.

Kooper wrote in post #10935593
With the cash I save by going with the F4 I can upgrade to a 7D as well.

There you go!

Overread wrote in post #10925212
Based on your intent to be outside snapping at more wild subjects I would say that a plain 70-200mm lens isn't going to cut it for birds or animals unless you are very lucky and also have good fieldcraft methods. For generalist shooting 70-200mm range is a good range for landscapes, close up shots (esp if you throw in a set of extension tubes) as well as more generalist subjects.

You will however have a need for something longer for the wildlife ideas. Any of the 70-200mm L lenses will take a 1.4 teleconverter and still perform very well, but that still won't get you the most ideal range. Idealy you'll be wanting to push longer and that means a 2*TC and that enters a tricky area.

Firstly only the f2.8 lenses will take the 2*TC and retain autofocus, since canon camera bodies (aside from the 1D line) stop AF after the max aperture of the lens goes beyond f5.6 - and with a 2*TC you lose two stops of light - on an f2.8 lens that gives you f5.6 whilst on the f4 it gives you an f8 lens. Even if you trick the camera into letting you AF once you're at f8 the reliability of the AF drops very significantly.
AF aside there is also the image quality drop - for myself I found that the 2*TC on an original 70-200mm f2.8 IS L lens wasn't really up to my standard - it works yes and is good in a pinch when you have nothing else, but it just wasn't something that I found I used a lot because of its poorer performance. I used the 1.4TC however all the time without worries.

Now (and here things get expensive) the new M2 70-200mm f2.8 IS L lens however can take a 2*TC and retain good image quality - infact its image quality is comparable to that of the 100-400mm lens at the 400mm mark. (see here for example and comparison shots: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=869226 )

That of course is an expensive route all at once and if you are purely after a long ranged zoom you would be better served getting a 100-400mm lens for its 400mm mark. Do be aware there is some variation in quality control on these lenses, its far better than it was upon its release, but people still get softer copies (or more correctly they get copies that are more out of sync with their camera body than ideal). This can be corrected but can be a pain whilst you get things corrected.
If however you feel the need for a 70-200mm lens that will afford you a nice wide max aperture of f2.8 then aiming for the M2 might be expensive but will give you all that you desire in this area - that along with a 2*TC (note there are new TCs coming out in christmas, high price tag on them, but they also give you improved overall optical and AF performance)

Excellent point. With a mere addition of a 1.4X or 2.0X multiplier you have with the f2.8 lens the possibility of moving to a much larger zoom capability with little effort. The additional f stop can make the difference between being able to use auto focus or not. A 2x multiplier will make your lens a 140-400 lens at f4 or f5.6 ... with the f4 lens you are above the threshold of usable auto focus without a tape hack.

Danja Dave wrote in post #10934069
My understanding was that the f/2.8 IS MK I had the standard 3-stop IS which control shake in the horizontal and vertical axis only, that the f/4 IS had a similar system, but could correct for up to 4 stops, and the f/2.8 IS MK II had an even newer system (same as in the 100mm f/2.8 L macro) which was a 4-stop correction in all three axis.

Canon used to call this "hybrid image stabilisation" on the 100L, and I seem to recall hearing this was what they put in the 70-200 MK II.

Nopes...According to Canon USA's website, only the 100L has H-IS

"Normal" IS will correct, depending on its generation, anywhere from 2 (28-135IS-USM) to 4 (70-200/2.8 MkII) stops of angular camera shake about the horizontal and vertical axis.

Hybrid (the 100L version) IS will correct for 4 stops of angular and lateral shake about the horizontal and vertical axis.

You cannot really stabilise against the axis that runs through the centroid of the lens barrel (forward-backward direction) because it will need moving the elements back-and-forth rather than left-right...and when you do that, it's a case of changing the focus as well...

Snydremark wrote in post #10934988
And the rep I spoke to said that both the f/4 and the MkII have 4 stop IS, but the system in the MkII was freshly built for that purpose. So, while they both offer 4 stops, the MkII's system is newer.

The f/2.8L II IS's (4-stop)4th Gen. Image Stablization was made for "that purpose" and the f/4L IS's (4-stop)4th Gen. Image Stablization was me for what other purpose? I'm confused, what did the rep mean by that?

Kooper wrote in post #10935593
With the cash I save by going with the F4 I can upgrade to a 7D as well.

Good call. The f/4L isn't a slouch in lower light either. I took the following on an overcast sky as the day was drawing to a close with a f/4L IS, you'll be amazed: