Which 70-200mm?

EF 70-200mm f/2.8 non-IS
EF 70-200mm f/4 IS

I'm looking to add one of these lenses to my bag mainly for cityscape/landscape photography use. I'm going to Seattle in May, and I would like to have a telephoto lens by that trip. With that said, I am selling my TS-E 45mm to fund the purchase of either lens. I'm favoring the 70-200mm f/2.8 because it has a 77mm filter thread which would be great since my 17-40mm and 24-105mm lenses are both 77mm. So I can use my CPL and ND filters on that lens. However, if I'm being honest with myself, I'm going to very rarely need the f/2.8 aperture since it's being used mainly for cityscape/landscape use, and my camera will be mounted on a tripod the majority of the time. The 70-200mm f/4 IS is also appealing because it's lighter than it's 2.8 brother, so it wouldn't necessarily be a bear to carry when it's in my camera bag.

So for those of you who have owned either lens, what lens would go with based on said use?

If you absolutely dont need 2.8 the f4 IS is the way to go. Its a newer design, optically sharper than the other and as you noted its much lighter. The 4 Stop IS allows you to handhold it down to as low as 1/30 of a second (your mileage may vary) so unless your subjects are moving it may work for lower light situations.

For cityscape and landscape, definitely the f4 IS. You'll benefit from sharper images, IS and a smaller/lighter package. I would also consider the 70-300L. A large aperture just isnt a big concern for your uses and and the extra 100mm might benefit you more than the extra stop on the long end.

I plan to pick up the latter to use as my long landscape lens on FF, as long of a telephoto as Ill ever need on a 7D and use my 135L when I need speed in this range.

definitely the f4 IS. it's perfect for your uses and it's one of the best zooms made . with it you can shoot landscapes without a tripod. i would not own a lens that length without IS but then again i would never let filter size be a serious consideration either .

make sure to go up queen anne hill. at 138mm.

Is there a reason you're not considering the f/4 non-IS?

If you don't need 2.8 and you'll be using a tripod anyways, seems like it'd be a great way to save some money (or have additional funds to spend on something else).

I just purchased the f/4 non IS waiting anxiously for it, does any users of this lens knows the sweet spot for it, is it good at any aperture, sorry to steal the thread

If you'll be shooting at 200mm a lot, I say the f/4 IS would be best. You definitely need the IS if your shutter speed will be low at 200mm. I have the 2.8L IS II and it is my best lens. At 200mm, I can shoot at 1/30 shutter easily and it will be sharp. Tried it with IS off, and my shots came out really blurry.

Get the 2.8 Non-IS if you'll be using a tripod.

jwatson31 wrote in post #15613928
Is there a reason you're not considering the f/4 non-IS?

If you don't need 2.8 and you'll be using a tripod anyways, seems like it'd be a great way to save some money (or have additional funds to spend on something else).

The f/4 non-IS is certainly a consideration as well. I owned a non-IS copy about 4 years ago, but I eventually sold it, which I now regret since it was extremely sharp. I guess I like the added feature of the IS in case I want to use it to walk around with. But the non-IS is certainly one I would definitely consider as well.

ed rader wrote in post #15613719
definitely the f4 IS. it's perfect for your uses and it's one of the best zooms made . with it you can shoot landscapes without a tripod. i would not own a lens that length without IS but then again i would never let filter size be a serious consideration either .

make sure to go up queen anne hill. at 138mm.

Is that from Kerry Park, Ed? I have been to Seattle before, but Kerry Park and the 12th Street Bridge will be my first stops when I arrive.

ed rader wrote in post #15613719
definitely the f4 IS. it's perfect for your uses and it's one of the best zooms made . with it you can shoot landscapes without a tripod. i would not own a lens that length without IS but then again i would never let filter size be a serious consideration either .

make sure to go up queen anne hill. at 138mm.

Awesome picture!! I pulled the trigger this morning for the f2.8L non IS version. This picture is making me think I made a mistake! I choose the the 2.8L non IS version because of indoor photos that I usually find myself clicking away...

7DSurfer wrote in post #15620553
Awesome picture!! I pulled the trigger this morning for the f2.8L non IS version. This picture is making me think I made a mistake! I choose the the 2.8L non IS version because of indoor photos that I usually find myself clicking away...

Don't worry, the 2.8 will always be sharper than the f4 when both are shot at f4. they get more equal as aperture closes down. I'm sure you'll still take amazing shots with the lens you purchased. just watch your shutter speed since it's non-IS

fashionrider wrote in post #15621994
Don't worry, the 2.8 will always be sharper than the f4 when both are shot at f4. they get more equal as aperture closes down. I'm sure you'll still take amazing shots with the lens you purchased. just watch your shutter speed since it's non-IS

That's not true at all. The F4L IS is sharper than the F2.8 throughout the range. If stop motion isn't what the OP has in mind, the F4IS is a superior lens by any measure.

You have got enough light?

The answer is strictly EF 70-200mm f/4 IS !
I have it and I am very pleased with it.

fashionrider wrote in post #15621994
Don't worry, the 2.8 will always be sharper than the f4 when both are shot at f4. they get more equal as aperture closes down. I'm sure you'll still take amazing shots with the lens you purchased. just watch your shutter speed since it's non-IS

Simply not true. The f4IS was canon's sharpest zoom until the 2.8 MKII was released.

not to hijack the thread, but i heard the f/2.8 non IS, isn't as sharp as the f/4 IS? but i've read the 2.8 is a must have for weddings which is what i have planned soon.

OP thanks for posting this, i was wondering the same things