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 19 May 2014 (Monday) 19:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tough decision, f4 vs 2.8

 
vienhuynh
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
308 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2012
     
May 19, 2014 21:10 |  #16

Nick5 wrote in post #16916091 (external link)
Vien.
I have both lenses you are considering. My go to lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 l IS Mark II. A gem of a lens. However a close second is the 70-200 f/4 L IS. One less stop of light, but lighter may lead to more use. I have no trouble recommending the f/4 L IS at almost half the price.

Thank you for your input. I agree on the weight term, plus the different in price might let me get the 35 art also, that is very tempting.


6D|Canon EF 24-70mmL f2.8ii|Canon EF 17-40mmL|Canon 70-200mmL f2.8 ii|Dolica

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
GregDunn
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 129
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Indiana
     
May 19, 2014 21:29 |  #17

MalVeauX wrote in post #16915917 (external link)
Get the F2.8.

Get stronger.

:lol: When shooting film with a fast 200mm I had to lug around a camera + lens made out of brass / alloy metals all day. I just reached over and picked it up - it's at least as heavy as my 5D3 + 70-200 f/2.8 even though it's significantly smaller (and less comfortable to hold).

I think one of the main advantages of the wider aperture is that it allows some camera bodies to use more sensitive AF points, and of course the finder is much brighter. I know my 70-200 f/2.8 focuses more accurately than my f/4, now that both have been microadjusted.


Canon 1Dx | 5D3 | 7D2 | 6D | 70-200L f/2.8IS | 70-200L f/4 | 24-70L f/2.8 | 24-105L f/4IS | 100-400L f/4.5-5.6IS | 17-55 f/2.8IS | 50 f/1.8 | 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 | 4x Godox AD360

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vienhuynh
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
308 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2012
     
May 19, 2014 21:52 |  #18

Thank for the advices guys, I decided to go with 2.8 after look thru the sample photos again. I don't wanna feel regret after :D


6D|Canon EF 24-70mmL f2.8ii|Canon EF 17-40mmL|Canon 70-200mmL f2.8 ii|Dolica

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
May 20, 2014 00:18 |  #19

vienhuynh wrote in post #16916202 (external link)
Thank for the advices guys, I decided to go with 2.8 after look thru the sample photos again. I don't wanna feel regret after :D

Just keep in mind, that there are "some" (but not many ;) ) users who had regret buying the 2.8, only to sell it for the f/4. The weight being the issue.


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vienhuynh
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
308 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2012
     
May 20, 2014 00:28 |  #20

1Tanker wrote in post #16916409 (external link)
Just keep in mind, that there are "some" (but not many ;) ) users who had regret buying the 2.8, only to sell it for the f/4. The weight being the issue.

Haha, thank you for your input. I have been carrying heavy backpacks for 12 years of schooling, plus I got the luma cinch for the strap, I think i will do okay with a 15 inch laptop equally lens on the shoulder :)


6D|Canon EF 24-70mmL f2.8ii|Canon EF 17-40mmL|Canon 70-200mmL f2.8 ii|Dolica

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
May 20, 2014 00:40 |  #21

Even if it weighed twice what it does I'd never sell my 70-200 2.8 II




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lumens
Senior Member
447 posts
Likes: 79
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Mesa, AZ
     
May 20, 2014 07:53 |  #22

I'd love to have the f2.8 but opted for the f4 IS instead, mostly due to price. The tag on the f2.8 is heftier than than the actual weight!!

I love my f4, but with that said I do nothing but shooting outdoors as a hobby. It fits perfect into what I do. If I did indoor shooting under limited light the hefty price of the f2.8 would definitely be worth it. I haven't owned a 2.8 but know those who do, you can't go wrong with either, but advantages/disadvantag​es and how you intend to use it makes a world of difference as to it being "worth it".


FUJI XT-2 & FUJI XT-3 ->
12mm Roki, 16 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 56 f1.2, 80 Macro
10-24, 18-55, 55-200, 100-400

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Somedude18
Member
133 posts
Joined Nov 2013
     
May 20, 2014 08:05 |  #23

If you don't go on hiking trips or long traveling definitely get the 70-200 F2.8. The IS II if you can afford it, but the non IS has stunning IQ as well. The F4 (IS) is perfect if you want to take it on traveling etc.. But for full body portraits it's not that great if you are looking for that nice subject isolation.

As far as background blur, you can get nice bokeh from the f/4 when you're close to your subject (headshot / half body shot) and the background is far away... However, if you're shooting in a small garden or shooting full-body pictures, the background blur (in my opinion!!) isn't that impressive on the f/4. The f/4 doesn't isolate the subject as much as the f/2.8 does.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
May 20, 2014 08:09 |  #24

Good decision, to get the f/2.8, you won't be disappointed.


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
chuckmiller
Goldmember
Avatar
1,248 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 726
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida and Daytona Beach, Florida USA
     
May 20, 2014 08:13 as a reply to  @ Somedude18's post |  #25

Consider how often or not you will use the lens at 2.8 and the somewhat thin depth of field 2.8 gives and the increased distance to subject you will need to add for more DOF.


.
.
.
Retired from Fire/Rescue with 30 years on the job 1/05/2019

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,072 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6158
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 20, 2014 08:37 |  #26

chuckmiller wrote in post #16916906 (external link)
Consider how often or not you will use the lens at 2.8 and the somewhat thin depth of field 2.8 gives and the increased distance to subject you will need to add for more DOF.

Once you get the hang of it , you will shoot it wide open all the time.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,283 posts
Gallery: 1696 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10665
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
May 20, 2014 09:04 |  #27

Charlie wrote in post #16916941 (external link)
Once you get the hang of it , you will shoot it wide open all the time.

Exactly,

You don't buy an F2.8 lens to shoot at anything other than F2.8 in terms of telephotos.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chuckmiller
Goldmember
Avatar
1,248 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 726
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida and Daytona Beach, Florida USA
     
May 20, 2014 09:10 as a reply to  @ MalVeauX's post |  #28

Okay, what if you are forced to be closer to the subject than you would like and want long DOF. Such as street photography. You'll be off that 2.8 pretty quickly.


.
.
.
Retired from Fire/Rescue with 30 years on the job 1/05/2019

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
May 20, 2014 09:15 |  #29

Charlie wrote in post #16916941 (external link)
Once you get the hang of it , you will shoot it wide open all the time.

Exactly, mine is stuck at f/2.8 :lol:
I don't recall if i went one day at f/3.2 :lol:


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,283 posts
Gallery: 1696 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10665
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
May 20, 2014 09:20 |  #30

chuckmiller wrote in post #16917022 (external link)
Okay, what if you are forced to be closer to the subject than you would like and want long DOF. Such as street photography. You'll be off that 2.8 pretty quickly.

Usually I want the thin depth of field. I shoot a lot of F1.4 in the 50~85mm ranges.

If I wanted a long depth of field, I wouldn't be walking around doing street photography with a 70-200 F2.8L II anyways. For street, I usually want wider angles, so I like 28mm to 40mm, and I like F1.4 to F2.8 there. I only go for long depth of field when doing architecture in the street.

If I were buying the F2.8 telephoto lens, I would be stressing to use it for it's F2.8. Otherwise, if stopping down, you just wasted $1000+ and could have been much happier with the lighter, and nearly as good F4L IS. This is my point. We don't buy an F2.8 lens just to stop down.

If depth of field is a problem and you wanted fast glass, the focal length was your issue.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

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

3,326 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tough decision, f4 vs 2.8
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 AlexRapp
1344 guests, 270 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.