70/200 f4L Is non IS or 200 f2.8L

Hi
I would be grateful for a little help please. I have had a small windfall and am looking for a lightweight longish lens, preferably L glass. I have the Bigma which is great but is a bit too heavy and cumbersome to carry round all day. I am thinking about the 70-200 f4 L with and without IS or the 200 f2.8 L. I dont shoot sports and very little indoors where I need the longer length so it is mainly outdoors,wildlife( grab shots) and general use. The 70/200 non IS and the 200 f2.8 are about the same price I am having difficulty deciding if IS is worth £250 on the 70/200.
The 70-200 f2.8 I am ruling out on weight grounds

Yes, the IS is worth it, and even more so with the 70-200. Once you've used IS when you needed it, you don't want to be without anymore .

Considering your requirements, i.e., outdoors, not cumbersome, general use, go get the 70-200 F/4 L IS. You'll never look back .

HTH, kind regards, Wim

the 70-200 f4 is awesome, i think you would enjoy the versatility of a zoom lens over the prime for walking about. i'll sometimes just go out with the 70-200 on my camera... very sharp, very fast focus, lightweight, don't have anything to complain about

wimg wrote in post #3503807
get the 70-200 F/4 L IS

I agree. If you can afford the f4IS, get it. Otherwise, for all-around use, get the non-IS then.

In your situation I would say go for the f4 IS. IS is awesome, I didn't really think I needed it before I used it, but once I did it I LOVE IT.

Will you need the wide end of the 70-200? If you do, i guess its best to go for the F4 IS. If you see yourself shooting at 200mm, personally i'd go for the 200L. Very sharp, super colours, great bokeh. Best of all it's light and it isn't white!

I have the non-IS F/4 and it is truly a wicked lens - so sharp and very lightweight.

Go with the f4IS. Tack sharp lens...and "portable"...

I have the f4 non IS--I love it and it's light weight. I think that if I'd ever tried it with IS, I'd prefer that, but I find it very enjoyable and usable without it and don't plan to switch. It's a great lens one way or the other

Hey, I gotta agree. Since you said lightweight, go for the f4. I recently got the 2.8IS and it's much, much heavier than the 4IS. While I do love this lens, it does give you pause when you're going out for a day. I never thought about taking the 4IS with me - it always came along. Both offer incredible IQ. You'll be happy either way, but since you said lightweight, only the f4 comes to mind.

The f4 IS, is the way to go.

I have IS on my 24-105 and absolutely love it. I'd recommend you to go for a lens with IS.

When I was looking for a 70-200 I was debating if the extra cost was worth it. The main thing is value seems like, but I went ahead and spend the extra money for the 2.8 IS and I've used non-IS 70-200 2.8. I love it, I feel like I don't have to worry about not having the best. It is a tad heavier but to me I don't get bothered by it. I mainly hand hold my 70-200 f2.8 IS.

Chris

If you're shooting people in low light, IS on the f/4 isn't gonna help much, 4 stops or 3. 2.8 will give you double the shutter speed, though. Personally, I'd take the 200 2.8L over the 70-200 f/4L (IS or not) anyday.

Ronald S. Jr. wrote in post #3504341
If you're shooting people in low light, IS on the f/4 isn't gonna help much, 4 stops or 3. 2.8 will give you double the shutter speed, though. Personally, I'd take the 200 2.8L over the 70-200 f/4L (IS or not) anyday.

So let's say you're very good at hand-holding and you get the advertised 4 stops. 2.8 only gives you one stop over f4, so you have a 3 stop advantage over the 2.8 with the IS.

Same bokeh? Definitely not, but if you're doing low light, the IS will help quite a bit.

Sharpness? The 70-200 f4 IS had better MTF than the 2.8 according to photozone.

Overall picture quality? Wide open, the 2.8 will most likely produce better results, but you'll sacrifice the versatility of zoom (depending on what kind of stuff you're shooting).

I guess I don't understand why people think IS doesn't help much if you get 4 stops. It would be like having a 70-200 f1.2-f1.4 (minus the bokeh and slower shutter speed, but that depends on application).