70-200 f4 + 85 f1.8 vs 70-200 f4 IS

I like the versatility of my 70-200 and I use it as my overall long range/candid/sports/po​rtrait lens.

Often times I find my pictures being a little blurry due to camera shake. 2 weeks ago I did my first photo shoot in which I had to keep the SS at 1/250 for flash, and some of the pictures weren't too sharp. I guess my hands are really wobbly.

I've had my mind set on the IS version, mainly due to its, well, IS, but also because its very sharp & flexible. The IS would definitely help with the SS being restricted to 1/250. But after looking at the Archives, I'm now entertaining the idea of a 85mm f1.8, since it can help me in low light, I won't need as fast a SS, and subject separation.

With the money it'll cost for me to upgrade to the f4 IS, would you recommend me buying the 85mm f1.8 instead?

I'm just afraid it's too close to my 60mm Macro, which I need for product photography. How much difference is the bokeh of the 60's f2.8 versus the 85's f1.8?

Is the 85mm used for product photography at all?

shaky hands <- IS
I like the new(er) IS on my 70-200/4 and 15-85.
I hope Canon will make the newest hybrid IS available on more lenses

Not sure if this is the answer you're looking for but I have the 70-200 f4 IS and I can't imagine having/using the non-IS version. The IS has proven invaluable numerous times, most notably on a recent Alaska cruise where we went on a whale watch. I wouldn't have the pics that I have were it not for the IS. I also have the 85 f/1.8 (also the 50 f/1.4) and both of these lenses have been absolutely essential for low light & concert photos. For product photography either should be fine unless you need true macro in which case you should look at the 60 or the 100 macro. Hope this helps a little.

If you buy the 85 f/1.8 used, you could sell it off for the same price if it doesn't work out for you. Shouldn't be hard to find or sell I wouldn't think.

Buy the tools you need to get the job. If you need the macro for your products, then you need it. Use the 85mm 1.8 for other things. That said, you can always go for its sister lens, the 100mm f2 if you want more seperation in your lenses.

Why not try a monopod or maybe work on your technique a bit, with flash and 1/250 you should get sharp photos with or without IS. I have the 70-200 2.8 Non IS and I usually keep a small Manfrotto modo monopod with me for times I need the extra balance. works wonders for only $35.


I love the 85 for its size and low light ability. Very sharp very fast focus.

Tommydigi wrote in post #10810897
Why not try a monopod or maybe work on your technique a bit, with flash and 1/250 you should get sharp photos with or without IS. I have the 70-200 2.8 Non IS and I usually keep a small Manfrotto modo monopod with me for times I need the extra balance. works wonders for only $35.
I love the 85 for its size and low light ability. Very sharp very fast focus.

I switched from the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens to the IS version and never looked back. Sure, I could have sometimes used a monopod (and I did) with the non-IS version but, in my style of shooting, a monopod is not always a handy thing to use.

I shoot with a pair of cameras (Canon 30D and 40D) using 17-55mm f/4L IS and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lenses. If I had a monopod attached to the camera with 70-200mm lens, it would be difficult to handle the camera equipped with the 17-55mm lens.

The 17-55mm and 70-200mm f/4L IS are my travel and general photography choices. I will often shoot hand held with the f/4L IS lens using 1/60 or even 1/30 second with quite decent results. It is a lot more flexible to hand hold a lens than to use a monopod.

During a recent two week tour to China, we would often pack our suitcases in the morning, place them outside our hotel doors where they would be picked up and delivered to the plane in which we would fly to the next city that afternoon. We would not see the suitcases until we arrived in our new hotel room and the luggage was delivered to our door.

I could not use a monopod on days like this because I would not be allowed to carry the pod aboard the aircraft due to security reasons. I couldn't use the pod and pack it in my suitcase for the flight because I never saw the suitcase again until arrival in the next city's hotel.

Not saying a monopod is the end all but since he already has the lens it may be worth a shot before investing in the IS version.

Tommydigi wrote in post #10810897
Why not try a monopod or maybe work on your technique a bit, with flash and 1/250 you should get sharp photos with or without IS. I have the 70-200 2.8 Non IS and I usually keep a small Manfrotto modo monopod with me for times I need the extra balance. works wonders for only $35.


I love the 85 for its size and low light ability. Very sharp very fast focus.

True, indefinitely have to work on my technique a bit. I CAN get sharp shots at 1/250, but at times I mess up and those few "good" pictures were ruined. I can definitely entertain the idea of a monopod, but I love to just go around and shoot random candid. I can see myself using a monopod when Im on a planned shoot, but for everyday random pictures.

I tried my friend's 70-300mm IS and I love the IS. I can definitely see myself benefitting from it, but am not sure if the 85mm would be a better purchase for portraits.

For those of you who have both a 70-200 and a 85 f1.8, do you find these 2 lenses overlapping a lot in terms of what you guys are shooting?

I have both and don't feel them overlapping at all even though the FL does. I must admit the 85 is probably my least used lens but have used it mainly for portraits and indoor sports. The 70-200 is a more all-around tool for me but not that good indoors at least without flash.