owning both or just one EF 70-200mm f/4L IS and EF 70-200mm f/2.8

I was ask this question by a friend and said why own two. Thats me, just wanted to ask here and see what the worl thought of it.

Is it crazy to own both EF 70-200mm f/4L IS and EF 70-200mm f/2.8


THE EF 70-200mm in the poll should have been the EF 70-200mm 2.8 version, can't edit that now.

if you have the 2.8 I dont see the point of having the f4, the 2.8 is better obviously and I dont think you really need IS because you can have high shutter speeds

If I had the 2.8 I'd get rid of my 4. Don't see why you really need both. Sell it and get a different lens.

IF, and thats a BIG IF, i were to get a F4 series i would get teh non IS and use it purely as a light travel tele, therefore wouldnt be able to justify spending for the IS version. the 2.8 does everything i need it to though, and ive gotten used to the weight and size, so i dont see myself ever getting the F4 at all.

$1000 of camera money to buy nearly the same lens?

I could make a looooong list of other ways to spend that cash.

Same here DrPablo.

Buy the 2.8 IS alone, then spend money as you see it needed.

Maybe 1 or two lenses as walk arounds in the 28-75 region. I could think of a lens and a couple accessories that would happily accomodate the 2.8 IS.

Or just buy the same one you and I have, the 70-200 f/4L without IS, saving yourself more than $1500 -- a little bit more saving and you could get a 5D.

thats an awesome idea. good thinking paul.

Yea, if you dont think you need the wider lense, then go with the f/4 and buy something awesome like the 5D (if you need it)

Or get a bunch of other toys to play with -- check my sig -- everything below my Canon 300D I've gotten with money that I'd originally intended for a 5D (well, plus quite a bit more)

arizona85224 wrote in post #2833500
I was ask this question by a friend and said why own two. Thats me, just wanted to ask here and see what the worl thought of it.

Is it crazy to own both EF 70-200mm f/4L IS and EF 70-200mm f/2.8


THE EF 70-200mm in the poll should have been the EF 70-200mm 2.8 version, can't edit that now.

It seems like you already have the f/2.8. I'd stay with that one. I thought about getting 24-105 f/4 in addition to my 24-70 f/2.8 because I wanted the extra reach of the 105. But I decided to put a Kenko 1.4x TC, which effectually turns my 70 f/2.8 into about 100 f/4, which was close enough. But for you, I'd say getting the f/4 would belong to the redundancy department of redundance.

If you've really got money to burn and use the 70-200s alot, it's not necessarily that crazy to own both. The main reason I got the f/4 IS was because of the weight and size. However if I really ever needed the f/2.8, it would be nice to have that too. Of course, there are LOTS of other glass I'd rather get ahead (and bills to pay) instead of another 70-200, but if I really had alot of cash.. I'd consider it.

Just went from Sigma to the 70-200L 2.8 IS.

Most information I was able to gather, seems to indicate that the 70-200 f4 is a little sharper for two reasons: No IS, and aperture. (However, IS and 2.8 may be something you want).

I would never consider buying both. To me it is a waste of money. If I want F4, I turn off IS and step the F value twice. If I want F4 IS, I simply turn IS on.

So if I owned the f4 non IS, and I wanted 2.8 IS, I would be out of luck.

Hope this helps, my .02.

baw5t0n wrote in post #2835435
It seems like you already have the f/2.8. I'd stay with that one. I thought about getting 24-105 f/4 in addition to my 24-70 f/2.8 because I wanted the extra reach of the 105. But I decided to put a Kenko 1.4x TC, which effectually turns my 70 f/2.8 into about 100 f/4, which was close enough. But for you, I'd say getting the f/4 would belong to the redundancy department of redundance.

I do have one, but I must have worded it wrong because It is a friend that asked me. He wants to have them both, not me. I think it is foolish to do that and better to spend the money on something else. Sorry for any confusions

The only reason i can see why you would have both is that the physical size differences may allow you to do more with the F4 version.