Canon &0-200 f4 IS or 2.8

J

Jed Shields

Suspended / Banned
Messages
50
Name
Jed
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys,

with the cashback on offer at the moment, both of these are looking tempting, but which one?

I have a 7D but haven't had it long enough to test out how well it handles high ISO if I can't get enough light with an f4. How does the IS and slower shutter speed compare to more light with the 2.8?

Cheers,

Jed
 
What are you planning to use it for?

Remember that IS doesn't make up for subject movement.
 
Mainly photo's of my family, my two boys running about, some zoo stuff etc. I'm pretty sure that the 2.8 is the way to go, but wanted some opinions of people who have used them... I've got a 17-55 f2.8 IS as my walkabout lens, this one will give me a longer reach.
 
Don't think you'll split them on image quality. I have recently bought an 2.8 IS MkII and is the best lens I've got. If you can afford the extra I'd take the 2.8 every time. If you want to save a bit of money to put towards other lenses you won't feel hard done by with the f4.
 
Last edited:
I had the f2.8 but found it too heavy for the sort of subject you've mentioned. I now have the f4 and don't regret it. For the sake of one stop it's a much lighter lens so easier to carry, and image quality is just as good.
 
To be honest, the f4 is so much lighter if I was a young dad buying a lens for family days out, the f4 would do. My 2.8 was bought for dingy church interiors and rally stages at dawn and dusk.
 
Nothing is ever straightforward lol. I don't think I'm too concerned about the weight, I'll be carrying it around in a Vertex 200 while not in use and won't be shooting non stop for hours. Then again, the Vertex is starting to get heavy as it is and I'm not getting any younger ;-)
 
I have f4 IS and its the best lens I have used by a long stretch, the shots never fail tom impress me, the thing that put me off the 2.8 was the weight it is a fair bit heavier, and the IS does help. IS vrs the extra stop really depends on your needs, but both are great lenses.
 
Depends which versions your talking about

70-200mm f2.8 (non IS)
70-200mm f2.8 IS MKI
70-200mm f2.8 IS MKII

The 70-200mm f4 (non IS) is a very good lens. This was updated and by all accounts the 70-200mm f4 IS is a great lens, sharp and the IS system massively improved and on performance it matches the 70-200mm f2.8 IS MKI although the advantages of that is the extra f-stop.

If you looking at adding a TC, The MKII f2.8 will take the MKIII TC much better than the MKI f2.8 who's performance I've not been totally impressed with although on its own without a TC is a very good lens. Not used the f4 IS but the non IS version is another great lens. At the end of the day it Depends on your budget
 
This may sound a bit daft but i find the extra weight of the 2.8 makes for a better balance on my MkIV. But maybe I'm just odd because I like handholding my 500 as well. :)
 
Referring to your question about 7D noise at high ISOs. Its ok, but not great :(.

Its on a par with a 550D (using the same sensor). So after 800 iso you will notice noise, of course this can be toned down in post processing and if your shot is well exposed its much easier to manage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top