Canon 70-200 (F4 IS or F2.8 non-IS)!?!?!

Well you lot haven't help make my decision up at all

@ TaDa, i've had alot of bad experiences with non canon kit (I went through 3 10-20s before giving up at getting a perfect 10-22 first time).

If I was going to sell up everything I would, but im not. So the 7D will be the main camera along side my 40D.

Size, weight and budget isn't really the issue (Well its not so much of an issue or i'd get the F2.8 IS)

Im assuming build quality and AF speed are the same (I certainly couldn't tell of any difference between the F2.8 IS and F4 IS on a 40D).

So IMO all it comes down is to which is sharper overall and the extra stop vs. IS.

So overall, is the F2.8 non-IS sharper than the 70-200 F4 IS or not?

Cheers

Concorde Rules wrote in post #9950156
So overall, is the F2.8 non-IS sharper than the 70-200 F4 IS or not?

Cheers

I don't know which is sharper but the f2.8 non-IS is very sharp at f2.8. Something else to think of, while IS will give you extra room for slower shutter speeds it won't be able to freeze action/people moving if your shutter speed gets too low. If you think you will get into situations like that it might be worth the f2.8 anyway.

Something else to consider.. the f2.8 lens is infinitely sharper at f2.8 then the f4 lens would be and by the time you get to f4 on the f2.8 it would probably be a wash anyway

Concorde Rules wrote in post #9950156
Well you lot haven't help make my decision up at all

@ TaDa, i've had alot of bad experiences with non canon kit (I went through 3 10-20s before giving up at getting a perfect 10-22 first time).

If I was going to sell up everything I would, but im not. So the 7D will be the main camera along side my 40D.

Size, weight and budget isn't really the issue (Well its not so much of an issue or i'd get the F2.8 IS)

Im assuming build quality and AF speed are the same (I certainly couldn't tell of any difference between the F2.8 IS and F4 IS on a 40D).

So IMO all it comes down is to which is sharper overall and the extra stop vs. IS.

So overall, is the F2.8 non-IS sharper than the 70-200 F4 IS or not?

Cheers

hey there Concorde

I went from the 70-300 USM IS to the 70-200F4is with 1.4 tc. the jump in quality is amazing... And thats on my aging 350d!

wide open at F4 or with the tc at 5.6 is supersharp

YOu wont be disappointed!

Sharpness is really a non-issue as they are both very sharp-one thing the 2.8 has going for it is that the center focus (on both cameras) is designed to be more accurate with a 2.8 or larger apperture lenses.I was thinking about selling one of the 70-200's but I can't let either one go.I love the 2.8 to shoot sports with but not to carry around all day just shooting - thats what the 4.0IS is good for.The higher useable ISO on the 7D really does level out the field.People let me get to the front more when I'm useing the 2.8.

eddyav wrote in post #9951137
Sharpness is really a non-issue as they are both very sharp-one thing the 2.8 has going for it is that the center focus (on both cameras) is designed to be more accurate with a 2.8 or larger apperture lenses.I was thinking about selling one of the 70-200's but I can't let either one go.I love the 2.8 to shoot sports with but not to carry around all day just shooting - thats what the 4.0IS is good for.The higher useable ISO on the 7D really does level out the field.People let me get to the front more when I'm useing the 2.8.

Haha! You've got both! Well that means you know what your on about then!

7D ISO + F2.8 = Win tho

Why haven't you gone F2.8 IS or in fact if you sell both F2.8 IS II? Weight etc?

Im leaning towards F2.8 and I suppose the next step up is F2.8 IS II..

Edit: Just learnt the 70-200 F2.8 does NOT have environmental sealing yet the F4 L IS does.

I have done shooting outside when its been raining meaning thats another point for the F4 L IS.

Or do I just get the F2.8 IS and be done with it.

Ah for crying out loud! I need to do more paid photography work... and get the F2.8 L IS Mark II

Concorde Rules wrote in post #9952117
Haha! You've got both! Well that means you know what your on about then!

7D ISO + F2.8 = Win tho

Why haven't you gone F2.8 IS or in fact if you sell both F2.8 IS II? Weight etc?

Im leaning towards F2.8 and I suppose the next step up is F2.8 IS II..

It's the weight AND the way that people notice (people stare,ask
stupid questions,etc...)The 4.0 gets noticed alot less (still does-gripped 7D catches eyes too).The higher useable ISO (on the 7D vs. the 40D) makes the 4.0 much more versitile than it was,but I like the 2.8 (the higher useable ISO helped that lens too) IS is not as needed,but would be nice.If you see my point than you would understand why I can't decide which to sell (if either).I'd love to have the 2.8II but for now I'm happy to have these two-I don't think the 2.8II would replace both but it would be nice to have (I haven't had one in my hands and the bank acct. tells me to run if I get the chance:lol.I bought the 2.8 first otherwise I'd probably have the 2.8 IS.

Ordered a F4 L IS in the end, more of an all rounder TBH.

One day i'll upgrade to the F2.8 IS Mark II

Concorde Rules wrote in post #9989134
Ordered a F4 L IS in the end, more of an all rounder TBH.

A great choice IMHO. I used to have a f/2.8 non-IS, but sold it primarily because of the weight and the lack of IS. I now have the f/4 IS, and absolutely love it. It's hands-down, no question the best lens I ever put on my camera and I haven't had one nanosecond of remorse for my former lens.

ceegee wrote in post #9989534
A great choice IMHO. I used to have a f/2.8 non-IS, but sold it primarily because of the weight and the lack of IS. I now have the f/4 IS, and absolutely love it. It's hands-down, no question the best lens I ever put on my camera and I haven't had one nanosecond of remorse for my former lens.

ha ha, it will have to compete for its title against my 17-55, love that lens

Kerso hasn't got any of the lens in stock so its going to be a while before I get it [Next week]