Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 20 Jan 2012 (Friday) 16:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 f4l IS or non-is?

 
Speedster159
Senior Member
Avatar
562 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Philippines ≥ U.S.A.
     
Jan 20, 2012 16:41 |  #1

I'm torn between the 70-200 f4l is and non-is.

Guys help me settle on one.


Panasonic HC-X1000 | GoPro Hero4 Black | 3770K

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
18,863 posts
Likes: 1056
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jan 20, 2012 16:44 |  #2

If money get the IS. No money no choice non IS. Simple.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Speedster159
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
562 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Philippines ≥ U.S.A.
     
Jan 20, 2012 16:46 |  #3

bobbyz wrote in post #13739602 (external link)
If money get the IS. No money no choice non IS. Simple.

Well, is the IS WORTH IT?

P.S Sorry for the bold.


Panasonic HC-X1000 | GoPro Hero4 Black | 3770K

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
18,863 posts
Likes: 1056
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jan 20, 2012 16:48 |  #4

Speedster159 wrote in post #13739611 (external link)
Well, is the IS WORTH IT?

P.S Sorry for the bold.

All depends on what you shoot. For some no, for most it is. And BTW - IS is not the only difference between these two lenses. It maybe the biggest difference but IS model is latest design of the f4 version.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 20, 2012 16:52 |  #5
bannedPermanent ban

Speedster159 wrote in post #13739611 (external link)
Well, is the IS WORTH IT?

Yes, but all depends on what you shoot.

For portrait and sports? get the f4.

For low light static scenes or whenever IS is applicable? get the IS.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
philwillmedia
Cream of the Crop
5,252 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Nov 2008
Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..."
     
Jan 20, 2012 16:54 |  #6

You could probably pick up f2.8 non IS for around similar (maybe a little bit more) money to the f4 IS, particularly if you looked at buying second-hand.
Unless you're specifically after an f4, the 2.8 would be a better option.
With 2.8 you can always use it at f4 but you can't use the f4 at 2.8.

EDIT...
I use a non IS 70-200/2.8 and also a Non IS 300/2.8.


Regards, Phil
2013/14 CAMS Gold Accredited Photographer | 2010 & 2011 V8 Supercars Aust. Accredited Photographer | 2008, '09, '10 South Aus. Rally Photographer of the Year | Catch Fence Photos - 2009 Photo of the Year (external link)Finallist - 2014 NT Media Awards
"A bad day at the race track is better than a good day in the office" | www.freewebs.com/philw​illmedia (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,785 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 303
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:01 |  #7

Speedster159 wrote in post #13739611 (external link)
Well, is the IS WORTH IT?

P.S Sorry for the bold.

yes. i've owned both. IS is always worth it on longer lenses. plus the IS version is a newer and sharper lens. you'll get more keepers than with a non- IS lens, no matter what you shoot.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff, sirui

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,002 posts
Likes: 986
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:03 |  #8

Yes, the IS version is a newer lens, total optical upgrade over the non-IS version. It was canon's sharpest zoom until the 2.8MKII came out. Worth the extra, if you can spare it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Speedster159
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
562 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Philippines ≥ U.S.A.
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:04 |  #9

philwillmedia wrote in post #13739662 (external link)
You could probably pick up f2.8 non IS for around similar (maybe a little bit more) money to the f4 IS, particularly if you looked at buying second-hand.
Unless you're specifically after an f4, the 2.8 would be a better option.
With 2.8 you can always use it at f4 but you can't use the f4 at 2.8.

EDIT...
I use a non IS 70-200/2.8 and also a Non IS 300/2.8.

How is video on the 70-200 at 200?

ed rader wrote in post #13739694 (external link)
yes. i've owned both. IS is always worth it on longer lenses. plus the IS version is a newer and sharper lens. you'll get more keepers than with an IS lens, no matter what you shoot.

ed rader

And how much do you think i can sell the f4 IS if i decide to sell it to fund something else or downgrade?


Panasonic HC-X1000 | GoPro Hero4 Black | 3770K

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 114
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:05 |  #10

It does depend on what you shoot, but for me, the nonIS wasn't worth it. I found my Tamron 70-300VC to be usably just as sharp, longer, less expensive, and with VC I could shoot stopped down a touch to f5.6 and still keep slower shutters than without IS at f4. (I sold the f4nonIS)
Now if my choice was the f4IS or my Tamron, I'd go f4IS w/out a second thought.


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
22,785 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 303
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:08 |  #11

Speedster159 wrote in post #13739706 (external link)
How is video on the 70-200 at 200?

And how much do you think i can sell the f4 IS if i decide to sell it to fund something else or downgrade?

a used f4 IS in mint condition maybe $900-950. i've had mine for about five years. i got it when the lens first came out. great lens for a great price.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff, sirui

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
philwillmedia
Cream of the Crop
5,252 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Nov 2008
Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..."
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:12 |  #12

Speedster159 wrote in post #13739706 (external link)
How is video on the 70-200 at 200?

I don't use video, so I have no idea

Speedster159 wrote in post #13739706 (external link)
And how much do you think i can sell the f4 IS if i decide to sell it to fund something else or downgrade?

If you bought it secondhand, you could probably get pretty close to what you paid for it, depending on how long you kept it for and what the price of a new unit is at the time.
Lenses, and particularly L lenses tend to hold their value fairly well.


Regards, Phil
2013/14 CAMS Gold Accredited Photographer | 2010 & 2011 V8 Supercars Aust. Accredited Photographer | 2008, '09, '10 South Aus. Rally Photographer of the Year | Catch Fence Photos - 2009 Photo of the Year (external link)Finallist - 2014 NT Media Awards
"A bad day at the race track is better than a good day in the office" | www.freewebs.com/philw​illmedia (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PHughes
Senior Member
355 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 47
Joined Nov 2009
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:27 |  #13

When you look at the cost difference of the two lenses, over how many years you will likely own it, yes it's worth it. I originally bought the non IS version, but before it was delivered I regretted it and bought the IS version and sent the other one back. I bought it the end of 2006 and have never regretted my choice.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,636 posts
Likes: 124
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:34 |  #14

Yes, IS is WORTH IT.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DL ­ Photo
Senior Member
577 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Richmond, BC, Canada
     
Jan 20, 2012 17:38 |  #15

I bought the non-IS version but returned it. Tougher to hand hold at longer FL, slower shutter speeds and low light (camera shake). If you don't mind using a tripod in those instances, or your primary shooting is action/sports at higher shutter speeds and good lighting conditions, then the non-IS is great for the money.

I picked up the f4IS version second hand and the extra money was worth every penny. Keep in mind that you gain a couple of extra stops when using IS.....hence you can shoot at the same FL and apperture, but slower shutter speed (in case you needed to know).

To complicate my reply, I got rid of the f4IS last year and picked up the f2.8IS.....needed it for lower light conditions. Have not regreted that decision either.

BTW....I sold my f4IS one year later for exactly the same amount that I purchased it for.


G16
OMD-10 (absolutely love this little devil)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,044 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 f4l IS or non-is?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is DSalazar
745 guests, 314 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.