70-200mm L question F4 VS F2.8. IS version.

Did anybody ever buy the F4 and regret not buying the F2.8? I am stuck between the two. I have read all the reviews and started to develop a headache thinking about it. I just don't want to buy the F4 and not be happy with it.

** edit I bought the F2.8 IS **

A friend of mine who showed me the 70-200 F4 and got me hooked to it is now regretting for not opting for the f2.8 which I did.

So either buy the f2.8 or not at all unless you are not going to make comparisions later.

Nope, completely happy with the f/4 IS (and happy I have an extra $600 in my pocket)

I have an 85mm f/1.8 when I need a fast lens.

egordon99,
That's what I was thinking but I just didn't want to regret buying the F4 and not getting the F2.8.

I had the f4 IS and loved it for its reduced size/weight. I ended up finding myself shooting in more situations that would have greatly benifited from the extra stops however so i sold it and got the 2.8 IS instead. Both are excellent lenses, and if you dont mind bumping up your ISO or if you have decent light, the F4 should be fine. Otherwise, I would reccomend the 2.8 only if you need the stops, and if you can afford the difference.

Click-it wrote in post #5642062
Did anybody ever buy the F4 and regret not buying the F2.8?

Yes. But only buy it if you NEED the extra stop.

I am satisfied with the 70-200 F4 IS . For me the 2.8 IS is too heavy and not worth the extra money.

You already have a EF 70-300mm. I'd go for the 2.8.

I have the "bargain basement" 70-200 f/4 (non-IS). I have no regret at all that I don't have the IS, 2.8, or 2.8 IS incarnations. Why? Because firstly I could afford it, so am comparatively much better off. Secondly, and mainly because I have no need for the extra stop, size and weight that the 2.8 offers. That would be like going out to buy a small car to get you from a-b and then regretting not buying a truck. Sure the truck would also get you from a-b, but it's much bigger and heavier, and the extra functionality it offers is not needed.

I have the f/4 IS - it's just the right weight for me, and as it's so long I use it purely as an outdoor lens. As egordon99 said I have a couple of primes (or the 17-55) if I need something faster.

I'm sure the 2.8 version suits some people but I have no regrets at all.

My 70-200 F4 IS is "Out for delivery" It'll be here any minute.

I could not justify buying the 2.8. I too have faster lenses @ 50 and 85mm.

I'll be selling my 70-300 IS at some point.

I have the F4L none IS and it works great outside with plenty of light. But I usually shoot portraits when the sun is coming down to take adavtange of the softlight, but F4 means I need to crank my ISO so I have been wanting to order the F2.8 version non IS of course. It's just a matter of do you need the extra stop or not. The F4IS version is really nice for portraits, but doesn't help with motion blur, I sometimes shoot sports at dusk and the F4IS doesn't help either..

What a hard decession to make. Its alot of money to make a whoops "should have bought the other one" thought.

no regrets here. F4 just didn't cut it for me for hockey or even baseball (unless it was a midday game.)

Sold my 80-200 f/2.8L for the f/4L IS and haven't regretted it for a second. The lighter weight and IS make the f/4L IS a much better lens for me, as I carry a heavy kit, so the weight savings was huge. Add to that the fact that the f/4 IS is the sharpest of any 70-200 lens Canon has ever made.