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 28 Nov 2013 (Thursday) 21:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200f2.8, IS or not?

 
jtmiv
Senior Member
347 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Harrisburg, PA
     
Nov 28, 2013 21:05 |  #1

Dear Board,

I'd like to buy a 70-200f2.8 but I'm wondering if IS is necessary?

I will be using the lens in a variety of situations, from walk around to indoor and outdoors sports like football, basketball, and ice hockey.

What I can't quite get my head around is the advantage of IS, particularly when shooting sports or any other time I am shooting outdoors? With the sports, like a basketball game, I figure I'd need to use 1/250 or 1/500 as a shutter speed which pretty much renders IS useless if I am thinking correctly?

With that in mind and a budget of $ 1500.00 which lens would you folks recommend from the following list, and why would you recommend it? IE -it's sharper wide open, it's lighter, it's better built, etc.

Here are my potential choices. I welcome your suggestions.

Canon 70-200f2.8L
Sigma 70-200f2.8 OS HSM
Tamron 70-200f2.8 VC

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)


EOS Elan, EOS7NE, EOS 40D, EOS1DMK2, Canon 15-85 IS EF-S, Canon 28-80 USM, Canon 28-105f3.5/4.5 USM, Canon 70-210f3.5/4.5 USM, Canon 70-300f4.5/5.6 IS USM, Tamron 19-35f3.5/4.5, Tokina 80-400 ATX 11, Sigma 150-500 OS HSM, Promaster 7500DX, Benro A3580F

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JayCee ­ Images
Goldmember
Avatar
1,544 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: CA
     
Nov 28, 2013 22:45 |  #2

Given your budget, I'd say find a clean used Canon 70-200 2.8 IS (version I). If you shoot handheld it's worth the extra couple/few hundred bucks over the non IS version, IMO. Also, the IS version is weather sealed where as the non IS version is not. I've had both versions and much prefer having the IS. Unless you are steady as a rock (I'm not), the IS is useful a good bit beyond the focal length/shutter speed rule.

I personally wouldn't even consider the Sigma or Tamron if you are concerned with build quality...


Nobody cares about your gear list...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
I ­ Love ­ Cats
Senior Member
269 posts
Joined Nov 2013
     
Nov 29, 2013 04:09 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

I have the Sigma 70-200 OS. On FF, 200mm is barely manageable without OS (IS/VC/VR?). On APSc, I don't even try 200 without OS. I can't get that steady.

Take a serious look at the Tamron 70-200 VC.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Paulstw
Senior Member
827 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2012
     
Nov 29, 2013 04:34 |  #4

I have the IS version and the lens would frustrate me if I didn't have it. 200 on a crop with the best will n the world handheld will have you thinking your have parkinsons.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lucy ­ Brown
Senior Member
Avatar
303 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Nov 29, 2013 07:10 as a reply to  @ Paulstw's post |  #5

Tamron. End of story.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
Avatar
3,089 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 118
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 29, 2013 08:06 |  #6

One benefit of IS when shooting sports is that the image in the viewfinder is stabilized to let you get focus and compose better.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Walkundertherain
Member
211 posts
Joined Sep 2013
     
Nov 29, 2013 08:10 |  #7
bannedPermanent ban

Many websites said Tamron 70-200 doesn't have attractive bokeh




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
majix
Senior Member
Avatar
392 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 80
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Plano TX
     
Nov 29, 2013 09:06 |  #8

I had Sigma non OS with out flash or tripod it is not useful inside , shutter speed must be at least 1/200 @ 200mm
if you have 5Diii or 6D you can use your ISO
I sold mine and bought a Tamron VC today :D


Majid flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)
http://www.mjdpic.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 123
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Nov 29, 2013 09:12 |  #9

I've had all three of Canon's 70-200 f/2.8Ls
For sports I would prefer the non IS over the MKI IS version. I felt that the IQ was a little better.
The MKII IS version is better in every way.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 29, 2013 09:20 as a reply to  @ Tapeman's post |  #10

Is it necessary, no! Is it desirable, yes!

I have a very sharp older Tamron 70-210mm f/2.8. I would only take it when I knew I was going to need it, plus at the very least a monopod (sometimes a tripod) would go with me.

I picked up a used Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS (MKI) for an excellent price (at the time). I almost always carry it when I have my camera, and I now seldom take the monopod.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
n1as
Goldmember
2,327 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Nov 29, 2013 09:20 |  #11

First, let's talk about brand. For sports (which is what I do), Canon is the ONLY answer. Why? AF performance. AF in sports is already a challenge. The minor AF performance differences with Sigma and others that does not matter for general photography becomes a make-or-break issue for sports. Shoot with Sigma (or Tamron, I presume) and your AF hit rate will drop.

For sports, IS is of minimal (not no) value. It helps you hold steady to keep the AF point on the player. You can get camera blur at 1/250 or even 1/500 of a second. I've done it. If you want player motion to be controlled, you'll need to be at least 1/500 or 1/800 sec. At those speeds, IS becomes less valuable.

I had the 70-200 Mk II. It was too heavy and f/2.8 was too slow for indoor sports. I use primes (85 f/1.8, 135L) instead to let in more light and get the shutter speed to where it needs to be.

If I were to buy a 70-200 now I would get the non-IS version. I don't need IS and the lens is heavy enough that I won't use it much. Paying $900 for a used lens that doesn't get much use is far more attractive to me than paying $1800.

YMMV.


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
Senior Member
Avatar
726 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 29, 2013 13:02 |  #12

I agree with the 'yes' parts of this question ... if you move at all, even at higher speeds for sports, you will most often get blur ... that's if you want the unexpected shot that suddenly jumps up in front of you.

And it happens more often than you'd think -

I've been shooting with the Canon EF 100-400 IS since 1999 ... and saw an improvement in my 'soft action shots' as soon as I bought it. You won't know the difference until you try it, but unless you have very steady hands at the high-end focal lengths, you can easily miss it or blur it, especially tracking a runner. After using one all this time (you can always turn it off) I'd spend the money again ... am planning in the 70-200 2.8 IS this week, and can save quite a bit with the non-IS, but will spend it. Looks like a $1000 bucks more, but Canon has a $300 mail-in rebate. SO, it might reinforce the choice ... :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jtmiv
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
347 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Harrisburg, PA
     
Nov 29, 2013 18:25 as a reply to  @ monkey44's post |  #13

Dear Board,

Thanks for your input so far. I didn't expect a clear and concise winner to emerge from my potential choices so I am not surprised that none has emerged.

If I were to buy a new lens I think I would lean towards the 70-200f2.8 L non-IS version. It has always gotten good reviews and I believe that it will perform slightly better on my 1DMK11 than any of the third party offerings. The Canon IS versions are above my $ 1500.00 budget.

With the third party lenses I would get IS with either of them and be at, or slightly below, the $ 1500.00 mark. I am not adverse to third party lenses. In addition, I'd get 3 or 6 times the warranty. That makes it tougher to decide.

To compound things I am even considering the 70-200f4 L, with and without IS. While I would like to do indoor sports photography it would only be as a hobbyist. In all honesty for outdoor use I'm sure the f4 version would be more than adequate for my needs. Outdoor sports would be during daylight hours so I may not need the f2.8?

Decisions, decisions!

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)


EOS Elan, EOS7NE, EOS 40D, EOS1DMK2, Canon 15-85 IS EF-S, Canon 28-80 USM, Canon 28-105f3.5/4.5 USM, Canon 70-210f3.5/4.5 USM, Canon 70-300f4.5/5.6 IS USM, Tamron 19-35f3.5/4.5, Tokina 80-400 ATX 11, Sigma 150-500 OS HSM, Promaster 7500DX, Benro A3580F

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Oldschool1948
Senior Member
Avatar
587 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 6
Joined May 2012
Location: Fort Washington, MD
     
Dec 01, 2013 16:08 |  #14

Rent the Tamron 70-200 VC and try it out. I don't think you'll be disappointed.


5DIII Gripped
AD360 | Canon 600EX-RT (x2) | 580EXII | L358
70-200 f4L IS | 24-70 f2.8L II | 50 f1.8 mk I | Tamron 150-600 G2
Canon Pro-10 Printer | Adobe LR6 | OnOne Raw

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timberlandlh
Senior Member
Avatar
450 posts
Joined Nov 2011
     
Dec 04, 2013 20:51 |  #15

I own the non IS and shoot motorsport with it and my 7d...match made, it's a flawless combo.


Canon S100 and Canon 7D, Canon 28-300L 3.5/5.6 IS, Canon 70-200L 2.8 non IS, Canon 10-22 I'll give it a lil "l", Canon 50 1.8, LEE 10X Filter, Benro Travel Angel A-169....REI back pack, hiking boots and a photogenic black labrador

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

4,638 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200f2.8, IS or not?
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 WorksofArtie
464 guests, 354 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.