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 04 Nov 2007 (Sunday) 01:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 f/4 IS or f/2.8 non IS?

 
rennwerkes
Senior Member
338 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:01 |  #1

I'm torn between these two lenses. Both are nearly the same price but can't decide which to get. I do on occasion shoot indoors but not as often as outdoors. I'll usually be using a monopod also.
Any advice? Thoughts?
Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JohnnyG
Worthless twinkle toes fairy
Avatar
3,719 posts
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:05 |  #2

I would get the f/4 IS personally! I love IS and would like all my lenses to have it! Plus, I've used the f/4 IS and love it.


Canon EOS 5D Mark II, 100-400IS L, 24-105 L[COLOR=black][FONT=&qu​ot] IS, 50mm f/1.4, Canon 430EX/580EX II, Kenko 1.5X, Epson R1900, Manfrotto 679B Monopod, 3021BPRO tripod, 808RC4 Head, 486RC2 Ballhead

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jra
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,568 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:05 |  #3

What are you shooting....IS is great but for moving subjects, it's no substitution for lens speed.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ironchef31
Senior Member
623 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:05 |  #4

I've agonized over this as well. I don't have a 70-200 range lens yet but even with my 17-55 2.8, IS is a definite advantage. Strictly between those two choices, I would go with the 70-200 F4 IS. You can leave your monopod at home more often.


Ken
30D, 18-55mm, nifty 50, 17-55 F2.8 IS, 70-200 F2.8 IS

I tried to bounce my flash off the ceiling once. Left a mark on the ceiling and broke my flash.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rennwerkes
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
338 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:08 |  #5

jra wrote in post #4248296 (external link)
What are you shooting....IS is great but for moving subjects, it's no substitution for lens speed.

That's just it, most of the time it'll be of non-moving objects but once in awhile it'll be sports type.
However, I was talking to one of the pro's in my area and he see's no point in IS and actually thinks it's more of a marketing gimmick. His rationale is if you've got the correct settings you'll be able to stop the action no matter what. So his thinking was to get as fast a lens as you can get, hence the 2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jra
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,568 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:11 |  #6

rennwerkes wrote in post #4248311 (external link)
That's just it, most of the time it'll be of non-moving objects but once in awhile it'll be sports type.
However, I was talking to one of the pro's in my area and he see's no point in IS and actually thinks it's more of a marketing gimmick. His rationale is if you've got the correct settings you'll be able to stop the action no matter what. So his thinking was to get as fast a lens as you can get, hence the 2.8.

You'll get lots of arguments one way or the other but when it comes to stopping motion, IS will never trump lens speed. If you plan on shooting fast moving subjects (sports) in not so great lighting, the f2.8 will always win the battle.....by one stop to be exact :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
swjim
Goldmember
1,669 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 27
Joined Jan 2006
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:13 |  #7

rennwerkes wrote in post #4248311 (external link)
That's just it, most of the time it'll be of non-moving objects but once in awhile it'll be sports type.
However, I was talking to one of the pro's in my area and he see's no point in IS and actually thinks it's more of a marketing gimmick. His rationale is if you've got the correct settings you'll be able to stop the action no matter what. So his thinking was to get as fast a lens as you can get, hence the 2.8.

IS isn't meant for stopping action, faster shutter speeds are. You mentioned that you will be shooting non-moving objects. If those objects are in good light then you might not need IS, but if you are going to be shooting in lower light IS can be very beneficial. It's more than just a gimmick, it works.


Jim

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aaagogo
Goldmember
Avatar
2,403 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:15 |  #8

As the way life is, if you get the 2.8, you will realize that all of a sudden, you will not be shooting any low light conditions at all, then again, if you get the 4, you will suddenly realize that you will be shooting tons of low light

IS or not, a faster lens is a faster lens, there is no replacement for it. I experienced it myself and understand now why those damn lens that do what they do are so expensive.

I say, bite the bullet and get the as high end one as you can afford. I'm sure you've read all the reviews and comments before you post this.(if you have yet to read them, please do read them, it will give you a clearer idea)

I would guess that your initial choice is f4 IS... and maybe you are looking for some people here to tell you the the f4 with IS can do what the 2.8 can do. Point is, one man's meat is another man's poison.

Do what ever you feel like it, if you regret, there is always the market place. That's how awesome this forum is :)


https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=4655753&pos​tcount=953 Your 1st 10,000 images are your worst
One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten photo out of focus are an experimentation, one hundred photo out of focus are a style

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mkfotos
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Joined Sep 2006
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:51 |  #9

Eat some ramen for a few weeks and get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS :lol:

...but out of the two choices you listed... you should probably go with the f/2.8. After all, faster glass is the optical equivalent of "no replacement for displacement" ;)

The 70-200 f/4 IS will require a lens foot ($), and the IS might turn off when you use the lens with the monopod you mentioned, leaving you with more money spent than the f/2.8, and only partial IS functionality. The lens is a bit sharper, but then the bokeh is not as nice, either.


1D Mark III * 5D Mark II * SD700 * LX-3 * 16-35 L II * 24-70 L *24-105 IS L * 50 f/1.4 * 70-200 f/2.8 IS L + f/4 IS L * 85 * 85 L II * 200 f/2 IS L * a ton of studio gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carl ­ s.
Member
113 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: twin cities, mn
     
Nov 04, 2007 01:42 |  #10

This is the same thing I'm trying to decide. I shoot a lot of motorsports so the f/2.8 would probably be better but I've seen a lot of amazing racing shots taken on the f/4. The f/4 IS is also attractive to me because the other subject I shoot a lot is landscape and wildlife which means lots of walking so the smaller size would be nice. It's so hard to decide - will the f/4 IS be too slow at 5.6 with a 1.4x extender for racing?


30D+BG-E2|30D|17-40L|400 f/5.6L|70-[COLOR=black]200f2.8L|430ex
http://carl-s.smugmug.com/ (external link)
http://wwww.ziptierall​y.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mkfotos
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Joined Sep 2006
     
Nov 04, 2007 02:01 |  #11

carl s. wrote in post #4248578 (external link)
It's so hard to decide - will the f/4 IS be too slow at 5.6 with a 1.4x extender for racing?

Not until you encounter heavily overcast skies, or other poor light conditions, most of which you should be able to compensate for by either bumping up ISO, or if you're good at panning, slowing down the shutter a bit.


1D Mark III * 5D Mark II * SD700 * LX-3 * 16-35 L II * 24-70 L *24-105 IS L * 50 f/1.4 * 70-200 f/2.8 IS L + f/4 IS L * 85 * 85 L II * 200 f/2 IS L * a ton of studio gear

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

1,146 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 f/4 IS or f/2.8 non 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 360nomad
1203 guests, 249 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.