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 18 Mar 2011 (Friday) 19:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Duel: 70-200 f2.8 vs f4.0 IS

 
MrLA
Senior Member
Avatar
727 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 18, 2011 19:07 |  #1

i've just got a 70-200 f2.8, like it a lot. i wonder how these two lenses compare indoor and outdoor for pixel junkies and bokeh whores?

please share your experiences of these two lenses. thanks.


Body: Canon 5Dc, (Coming soon <<<6Dc, maybe I shall wait for 6Diic with TouchScreen!).
Other Favorite Camera:
Flash: YN560
Lenses: change all the time!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KVN ­ Photo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,940 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
     
Mar 18, 2011 19:36 |  #2

I only have 70-200 f/4.0L non IS, so far I have good experience with it, but for indoor, I suffer a lot. Need flash to get sharp shot, I lend my friend 70-200 f/2.8 sometimes, it is big and heavy, and I don't think one stop difference help a lot. But overall, it is a very good lens, congrats.


X-Pro1 + 18-55 f/2.8-4 OIS + 55-200 f/3.8-4.5 OIS
TS-E 24 f/3.5L II + XF 35 f/1.4 + XF 56 f/1.2
Sony RX100 II + G12
Travel the world!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Mar 19, 2011 09:04 |  #3

The f/4 IS version is my fav of all EF 70-200's. SIze and weight have something to do with it.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
District_History_Fan
Goldmember
2,286 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 19, 2011 09:54 |  #4

gasrocks wrote in post #12049348 (external link)
The f/4 IS version is my fav of all EF 70-200's. SIze and weight have something to do with it.

Price too. :)

I love my 70-200f/4L IS. Its a great lens.


www.ericmcferrin.smugm​ug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Mar 19, 2011 10:15 |  #5

I used to have the f2.8 non-IS (Sigma), but sold it and bought the f4 IS instead - and have never once, not for a second, regretted my decision. In low light, the IS is extremely useful - my keeper rate with this lens is higher than it was with the f2.8. And it's so much smaller and lighter that I use it a whole lot more. I bought the f2.8 thinking I could use it for indoor sports, but in the end it turned out not to be fast enough; I need a fast prime for that. Once I'd realized that, the decision to swap for the f4 IS was a no-brainer in my case. The f4 IS is a stellar lens in every respect, razor-sharp and simply a joy to use.

Having tried the experience, I wouldn't now buy another lens in this focal range without IS. But that's just me.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ilumo
Goldmember
1,712 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2009
     
Mar 19, 2011 10:16 |  #6

District_History_Fan wrote in post #12049512 (external link)
Price too. :)

I love my 70-200f/4L IS. Its a great lens.

If you don't need 2.8 then f4 is will outperform the 2.8 IMO. I loved my f4


Body: 5D Mark IV
Glass: 50mm f/1.8 | 35mm f/1.4L USM | 17-40 f/4.0L USM | 24-70 f/2.8L II USM | 24-105 f/4.0L IS USM | 70-200 f/2.8L II IS USM | 85mm f/1.2L USM | 100mm f/2.8L IS USM
Accessories: 430 EX II, 600 EX, tripods, umbrellas, and other goodies.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,470 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 8260
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Mar 19, 2011 10:54 as a reply to  @ District_History_Fan's post |  #7

I have the f/4 IS model, and I think it's okay. It's bokeh is not good compared to what I've seen of f/2.8 mk. II model. DigLloyd has a nice comprehensive comparison between the two models, and the 70-200mm f/2.8 mk II displays demostrably better color and microcontrast across the board (all zones of the photo at all comparable f-stops).

That said, even IF the f/2.8 mk II performs better at equivalent f-stops, is it really a 1000 USD better? If you need f/2.8, then it's better. If you need the best possible bokeh from a 70-200mm lens, then the f/2.8 Mk II should be the pick. On the other hand if you mainly shoot in good light (shooting at f/8 and above) and do a lot of hiking, the lighter smaller form factor of the f/4 is better. And if you are competent in Photoshop, the slight quality difference lacking in the f/4 can easily be neutralized (except the bokeh).

I've decided to sell my f/4 70-200mmL IS lens, not because I think it's a poor lens, or to replace it with the f/2.8 mk II, but because I've decided to forego the considerable convenience of zooms in favor of the wonderful sharpness and bokeh of canon's best primes (like the 85mm and 135mm). But, that's purely an artistic choice for me...not right or wrong.


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
District_History_Fan
Goldmember
2,286 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 19, 2011 11:00 |  #8

David Arbogast wrote in post #12049778 (external link)
I have the f/4 IS model, and I think it's okay. It's bokeh is not good compared to what I've seen of f/2.8 mk. II model. DigLloyd has a nice comprehensive comparison between the two models, and the 70-200mm f/2.8 mk II displays demostrably better color and microcontrast across the board (all zones of the photo at all comparable f-stops).

That said, even IF the f/2.8 mk II performs better at equivalent f-stops, is it really a 1000 USD better? If you need f/2.8, then it's better. If you need the best possible bokeh from a 70-200mm lens, then the f/2.8 Mk II should be the pick. On the other hand if you mainly shoot in good light (shooting at f/8 and above) and do a lot of hiking, the lighter smaller form factor of the f/4 is better. And if you are competent in Photoshop, the slight quality difference lacking in the f/4 can easily be neutralized (except the bokeh).

One of the things I have always been very pleased with is the bokeh the f/4IS is capable of with the newer rounded aperture blades. There is no doubt the 2.8II would be better in critical situations (shorter focal lengths, closer backgrounds), but the f4IS is no slouch in regard to bokeh, all things considered


www.ericmcferrin.smugm​ug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Mar 19, 2011 11:41 |  #9

Bokeh using a zoom is always iffy. The f/4 L IS is one of the best.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrLA
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
727 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 19, 2011 13:13 |  #10

I have Canon 70-200 f2.8 Non-IS

Here is what i think, i maybe wrong though.

the advantage of f2.8(Non-IS) over f4.0(IS) is bokeh, due to thinner DOF characteristic of f2.8 vs. f4.0

Disadavantage: Due to the fact that this F2.8 has no IS the speed must be fast enough(>1/200 sec) to offset blur images; and it's heavy!

price: they're marginally same same.

I want to know if you guys rather have f2.8 than f4.0 with IS or vice versa and why?


Body: Canon 5Dc, (Coming soon <<<6Dc, maybe I shall wait for 6Diic with TouchScreen!).
Other Favorite Camera:
Flash: YN560
Lenses: change all the time!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrLA
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
727 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 19, 2011 13:16 |  #11

ceegee wrote in post #12049602 (external link)
I used to have the f2.8 non-IS (Sigma), but sold it and bought the 45 IS instead - and have never once, not for a second, regretted my decision. In low light, the IS is extremely useful - my keeper rate with this lens is higher than it was with the f2.8. And it's so much smaller and lighter that I use it a whole lot more. I bought the f2.8 thinking I could use it for indoor sports, but in the end it turned out not to be fast enough; I need a fast prime for that. Once I'd realized that, the decision to swap for the f4 IS was a no-brainer in my case. The f4 IS is a stellar lens in every respect, razor-sharp and simply a joy to use.

Having tried the experience, I wouldn't now buy another lens in this focal range without IS. But that's just me.

hmmm, you've got me thinking there...f4 IS + 135L? I already have 85 f1.8

would Canon 70-200 f2.8 II be everything in its range?


Body: Canon 5Dc, (Coming soon <<<6Dc, maybe I shall wait for 6Diic with TouchScreen!).
Other Favorite Camera:
Flash: YN560
Lenses: change all the time!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrLA
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
727 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 19, 2011 13:20 |  #12

David Arbogast wrote in post #12049778 (external link)
I have the f/4 IS model, and I think it's okay. It's bokeh is not good compared to what I've seen of f/2.8 mk. II model. DigLloyd has a nice comprehensive comparison between the two models, and the 70-200mm f/2.8 mk II displays demostrably better color and microcontrast across the board (all zones of the photo at all comparable f-stops).

That said, even IF the f/2.8 mk II performs better at equivalent f-stops, is it really a 1000 USD better? If you need f/2.8, then it's better. If you need the best possible bokeh from a 70-200mm lens, then the f/2.8 Mk II should be the pick. On the other hand if you mainly shoot in good light (shooting at f/8 and above) and do a lot of hiking, the lighter smaller form factor of the f/4 is better. And if you are competent in Photoshop, the slight quality difference lacking in the f/4 can easily be neutralized (except the bokeh).

I've decided to sell my f/4 70-200mmL IS lens, not because I think it's a poor lens, or to replace it with the f/2.8 mk II, but because I've decided to forego the considerable convenience of zooms in favor of the wonderful sharpness and bokeh of canon's best primes (like the 85mm and 135mm). But, that's purely an artistic choice for me...not right or wrong.

decision. decision. decision. i may have to follow your foot step, get the mark II


Body: Canon 5Dc, (Coming soon <<<6Dc, maybe I shall wait for 6Diic with TouchScreen!).
Other Favorite Camera:
Flash: YN560
Lenses: change all the time!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MeNiS
Senior Member
706 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2005
     
Mar 19, 2011 13:59 |  #13

recently picked up the f2.8 non-IS (used to have f4 non-IS). i hear it all the time from people saying this lens is HEAVY. i thought the weight was going to be really bad, but it's not at all.

yes, the lens is much heavier than the f4, but i acutally like the weight of it. i feel it actually balance out the weight better on the camera. when i had the f4, i always felt it was too light in the front when holding it.

haven't used the f4 IS yet, but looks like the f2.8 is a keeper for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisVickroy
Hatchling
1 post
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Texas
     
Mar 19, 2011 14:08 |  #14

I personally love my F4, I'd just like something a bit faster maybe the 2.8 is the way to go for me?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Mar 19, 2011 14:08 |  #15

Glad you found the lens you like.


GEAR LIST
_______________

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

19,751 views & 0 likes for this thread
Duel: 70-200 f2.8 vs f4.0 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 CoolGuy5Million
832 guests, 261 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.