70-200 f4 IS or 2.8

Would you get the 70-200 f4 IS or the 70-200 2.8 without IS?

Neither. Get the 70-200 f/2.8 with IS.

F4 IS would be better if you do a lot of low light, ambient light shooting. F2.8 non-IS would be best if you usually have ok shutter speeds.

Of course the 2.8 IS is the best option, and I wouldn't buy anything else. I just sold a 70-200 F2.8 IS for about US$2200, and purchased a V2 70-200 for quite a bit more.

Yep, 2.8 with stabilization is the way to go.

I've got the 70-200 f2.8 without IS and I must admit, I do miss the IS.

However! IS does nothing to stop object movement, so for example..

At a wedding where you're trying to capture candid shots of fast moving children or even people talking in the reception, that IS isn't going to be much help! But the 2.8 over the f4 will... alot!

I went for the 2.8 because of this, faster shutter speeds in low light to freeze action.

(Yes the 2.8 IS is a very good option, but as you didn't mention it in your OP I understand it must be out of the price range... understandably)

One massive tip... learn how to properly hold a camera, Joe McNally has a great method!

I would go for the 2.8 w/o IS.
I favor the extra stop vs the IS because I really like to isolate the subject, but that's just me.

The 2.8 IS is obviously the "no trade-off" option

got f4is, 2.8is weight was the reason why I didn't get it
it's going to be one of my travel lens, bag is heavy enough as it is

wburgess wrote in post #10692959
At a wedding where you're trying to capture candid shots of fast moving children or even people talking in the reception, that IS isn't going to be much help! But the 2.8 over the f4 will... alot!

It's very handy during the ceremony though.

^^ absolutely - and, for me, the main advantage of IS is that I can shoot at low shutter speeds without needing a tripod or monopod.

Of the choices listed by the OP I would take the f4 IS, and couple it with a camera capable of doing high ISO well.

Rob

Thank you so much, very helpful.

I have a wedding in a large church friday (the 13th dun dun duuuuun) She just booked me last night.

I should go with the 2.8IS, I think my husband would faint though.

I almost sold my 2.8 IS I version for the II, but I decided not to. That extra amount would kill me and I just got my vacation bill and I'm glad I didn't do it. If you can find a decent version I, you're good to go. That is a lot less and would do the job well.

I too would go with the 2.8 non-IS over the 4 (for the most low light capabilities generally), and focus on the hand holding technique. This is, of course, only when given the two options ONLY.

Peter
--
Wedding Photographer Tallahassee
Photography Wedding Tallahassee

Yes, IS will not help you with subject motion, but often times, you are under 1/200 for indoor ceremonies even with ISO boosted (and you don't have too much leeway with high ISO shooting a DRebel) so this is exactly the type of situation where IS comes in handy. Yes, doesn't change a thing as far as stopping subject motion, but it allows you to handhold a 200mm lens at for example, 1/160, which is fast enough to stop some mild subject motion. You would get blurry photos without IS at 1/160, especially on a 1.6x crop body, if you don't have really good technique.

Odds are the telephoto f/2.8 lens will ONLY be useful during times when the subjects aren't moving...unless you're allowed to use flash during the ceremony/processional.

2.8 with IS... obviously not one of the options. Thus I would get the Non-IS 2.8 so that I have it.