70-200 F4 vs. F2.8 non-IS

I've been looking at selling a couple of my lenses, including my 70-200 F4, to purchase an F2.8 non-IS. Naturally, my addiction to the F4 is almost uncurable, as those who have owned one would understand.

My question for the masses is: For those who have experience with both the F4 and F2.8 non-IS versions (both Canon) of the 70-200, which was your favorite? The colour and sharpness of my F4 is absolutely stunning, do you find that the F2.8 is similar?

I don't want to give up a great lens unless it's to fund an even better one

Thanks in advance all!

the 2.8 is the oldest of the 70-200s, and is supposedly being discontinued with the popularity of the IS version and the new f/4 IS.

the extra weight of the 2.8 is offputting to some, but it is a great lens.


have you thaught about the f/4 IS ? Doesn't give you the extra actual stop, but the implied 2-3 stops of IS. First sample images posted around are incredible

You aren't going to regret buying the 70-200 2.8 non IS. trust me.

Save for the IS version

IQ is about the same, the f2.8 version is faster, a bit bigger, heavier. If you want more speed, it's a good deal.

Thought about buying either the 2.8 or 4 IS, but decided against it. Dropped the idea of a 2.8 IS mainly because of price. I thought then about the F4 IS, but I want to shoot some indoor action shots, and I don't think the IS would be a benefit to that.

I have also heard that the moving element in the 2.8 IS can cause you to lose sharpness in some of your photos.

Using IS will not freeze motion, only a fast shutter speed will do that, so IS is of limited value there. Helps with panning for motor sports though. Then again, so does a mono/tripod.

Get the 2.8.

I owned both, and was in love with the f4 version. I now own the f2.8 version, and am just in love with it. Just remembre that the f2.8 version is going to be be a larger, heavier lens.

i dont mean to hijack your thread, but why start another with the same question?

Im looking at a 70-200 2.8 or 4..used only for outdoor sports(surfing,skatebo​arding,mx,paintball,et​c.) should i save alot of money and just buy the f4?

Obey wrote in post #2358743
i dont mean to hijack your thread, but why start another with the same question?

Im looking at a 70-200 2.8 or 4..used only for outdoor sports(surfing,skatebo​arding,mx,paintball,et​c.) should i save alot of money and just buy the f4?

depends on your lighting, but probably.

Without knowing more about your shoooting, I can only tell you why it was better for me.

Selling my 70-200 f/4L (along with a Tamron 28-75 and another $200 added to it) was the single best camera decision I have yet to make. It was worth every nickel and I'd do it again in a heartbeat.

If the thinner DOF and extra stop of light is important to your shooting, you will not regret it. I shoot mine wide open at least 90% of the time. YMMV.

Just to give an update, I came across a photog locally who wants to reduce some weight in his kit, so he is taking my 70-200 F4 + the cash from the 17-85 sale for his 70-200 F2.8. Just in time for my vacation

nice im still deciding between a f4 or f2.8 ...since i only do outdoor shooting, im leaning towards the f4

It depends on what you are using for. The f/4 is lighter and more compact and more convenient for carrying around. The f/2.8 is faster and allows shooting at twice as fast a shutter speed when light is limited.

If you shoot handheld in various light conditions try to get the IS version. My 70-200 f/2.8 is non-IS and there have been a few occasions when I would have had better pictures if I had IS.