70-200 f/4 or f/2.8

for shooting weddings, i think i already know the answer, but it is a $500 difference! haha, i just need to be convinced that 2.8 is necessary. my main concern is that i will get the f/4, and not be able to use it in low lighting, then i have a bum lens. what do u think?? help

If you have the word WEDDING you know you want the fastest zoom glass(2.8). everything else f4 is is just as sharp or sharper and lighter and lot cheaper....be sure you get the 2.8 IS if youhave the word WEDDING lol.

Well...unless the entire wedding is in immaculate lighting everywhere...I think the answer is already one you know. Sometimes you really do have to bite the bullet, but I think in your case it will easily be worth it!

f/4L IS can shoot in lower light levels

I can shoot the f/4L IS hand-held in lower light levels than I can shoot the f/2.8L non-IS.

I can shoot at 200mm using f/4 with IS at 1/60 second and get 100% sharp images. At 1/30 and f/4, the % of keepers is slightly lower - but, still respectable.

I CANNOT SHOOT at 1/120 second using 200mm without IS and expect 100% sharp images and I could get no sharp images hand holding at 1/60 second @ f/2.8 without IS.

The subjects in a wedding which are shot with tele lenses are usually not moving fast.

Simply put -as said above- the faster, the better. 2.8 does make $500 worth of difference at indoor situations or poorly lit places. My reasoning for choosing the faster lens is mighty simple.
If you are getting paid to take photos that can never be retaken, nor rehearsed before hand, and since you are walking into -say- a chapel often without a clear idea of where exactly you will stand from the couple, or how well the lighting will respond to the environment, having the extra power to make up for any contingency is key.

But hey, if someone is comfortable and experienced enough to shoot f4 IS/non-IS without need for anything wider, then they can save money and more power to them. As for me, when I started shooting such events I got the 2.8 IS L version, as soon as I was able to. Till then, I was on a Sigma 70-200 2.8 non IS.

Hope this helps.

Sports, low light. Has to be 2.8.

Everything else 4 is fine.

I have used my son's 2.8 IS for weddings a couple of times and love it. First time we both have a wedding on the same day I will likely get one. Until then, great to have a son who is a photographer and I can borrow his glass.

For weddings you should get the 2.8 with IS

And maybe a couple of faster primes.

Often, if f4 doesn't work, f2.8, won't either. It's not like f2.8 magically makes everything possible.

bohdank wrote in post #7647385
And maybe a couple of faster primes.

Often, if f4 doesn't work, f2.8, won't either. It's not like f2.8 magically makes everything possible.

what primes do you recommend?

I haven't shot a wedding, so I would not be the one to offer an intelligent, experienced, response.

Davidletran wrote in post #7647416
what primes do you recommend?

Are you considering primes because you want what is best? or are you working on a budget?...

Good prime lenses are top choice, but also their price tags. A nice wide angle, a 50mm, and a portraiture lens.

If you're shooting indoors in low light, the 4.0 just won't cut it. It's a great lens, but it has the limitations 4.0 has. I'd say get the 2.8 all day long. I really like 70-200 4.0, but I ended up getting the 135L plus the 1.4 converter to get a faster lens to supplement what I already have.