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 11 Jan 2014 (Saturday) 19:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Would I need IS in a 70-200 F4

 
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,605 posts
Gallery: 105 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 709
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
Jan 12, 2014 12:23 |  #16

Ev0d3vil wrote in post #16597760 (external link)
Price wise, it's way cheaper and now that I'm going flash setup, I'm afraid I may burst my budget so I may go this path, how does IS make a difference? What if the light is good?

I wouldn't be without it. I could have gotten the f2.8 mkI version (no IS) for $900, but I went with the f4 IS and have been so glad that I did.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
RayinAlaska
Senior Member
425 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Alaska's interior
     
Jan 12, 2014 15:09 |  #17

The f/4 without IS is a wonderful lens, and very lightweight. My answer to the OP is "no."

Most of my photography takes place during the day with plenty of daylight, so I don't miss IS. Also, IS is another thing to weaken the camera's battery during cold weather photography.

What did Canon camera users did with their 70-200 f/4 without IS? And now with cameras that can handle higher ISO speed while controlling digital noise to a greater degree, the old lenses still work as well as ever. Yes, IS give you an edge, but with an increase in weight, and cost. If you can afford both, go for it. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,502 posts
Gallery: 1843 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 11401
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 12, 2014 15:25 |  #18

RayinAlaska wrote in post #16599810 (external link)
The f/4 without IS is a wonderful lens, and very lightweight. My answer to the OP is "no."

Most of my photography takes place during the day with plenty of daylight, so I don't miss IS. Also, IS is another thing to weaken the camera's battery during cold weather photography.

What did Canon camera users did with their 70-200 f/4 without IS? And now with cameras that can handle higher ISO speed while controlling digital noise to a greater degree, the old lenses still work as well as ever. Yes, IS give you an edge, but with an increase in weight, and cost. If you can afford both, go for it. :)

Heya,

I'm in the same boat here. I use my 70-200 F4L as my zoom, as otherwise, I roll with a prime attached for my main lens (35mm). I've not really noticed the need for IS on my 70-200, but that's mostly due to how I use it. I keep my shutter speed high, and ISO up a touch to keep it there. I generally meter the scene and go full manual and set it. Otherwise, I like using Tv mode with this particular lens for walk around if I know I need the reach, with auto ISO and a set limiter (I don't like to go above 1600 on my camera).

But I got this lens for about $400. If I had extra money just laying around, I'd love to have the technically better lenses, like the IS version, and definitely would want the latest F2.8L version, just for the aperture alone. But I just can't justify the cost difference. The old 70-200 F4L is just a silly value at this point, it's so inexpensive for it's quality. And it's fairly light weight so I can carry it around when birding here in Florida without feeling like I'm holding a bowling ball.

If someone gave me $1500, I'd trade up to the F2.8L IS. But then again, if someone gave me that money, I'd more likely just buy the 100-400mm F5.6L that I crave.

Very best,


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lbsimon
...never exercised in my life
Avatar
2,683 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 268
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Boston, MA
     
Jan 12, 2014 17:41 |  #19

I just came home from a walk in the woods with the IS version of the lens. First I used it at high shutter speeds for birds, but closer to the end of the day, with poor light, I came to a waterfall. I wanted slow shutter, under 1/40 or something to do the water, and without the IS the hand shake would be inevitable.

Yes,a brand new 70-200 f/4 IS is much more expensive than its "poorer brother", but it is not that bad on used market. I got mine a few months ago for a little over $700, which is about the same as a brand new non-IS version. Just be patient, watch for it on For Sale here and on your local Craigslist, and you will be glad you did.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Jan 12, 2014 18:27 |  #20
bannedPermanent ban

RayinAlaska wrote in post #16599810 (external link)
The f/4 without IS is a wonderful lens, and very lightweight. My answer to the OP is "no."

Most of my photography takes place during the day with plenty of daylight, so I don't miss IS. Also, IS is another thing to weaken the camera's battery during cold weather photography.

What did Canon camera users did with their 70-200 f/4 without IS? And now with cameras that can handle higher ISO speed while controlling digital noise to a greater degree, the old lenses still work as well as ever. Yes, IS give you an edge, but with an increase in weight, and cost. If you can afford both, go for it. :)

The weight difference is really very small. Also when shooting in cold weather it is smart to take a couple of extra batteries anyway.

The thing people are not getting is IS is NOT the only difference between the lens. The IS version has been optically redesigned and produces much sharper images. I had both and now only the IS version. It s a much better lens, even without the IS benefits.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,532 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
Jan 12, 2014 18:52 |  #21

Hogloff wrote in post #16599064 (external link)
Exactly right. The IS version is much better optically...as well as having IS.

Hogloff is right. The main reason to purchase the IS version is the improvement in IQ over the non-IS version. See the Photozone reviews.




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

2,085 views & 0 likes for this thread
Would I need IS in a 70-200 F4
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 All-Media-Services
904 guests, 351 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.