Canon 70-200 4.0 to 2.8 ?

[oscaroque]

I just got my MarkIII, is it worth to do this upgrade since I can bump ISO up, would it make a big difference on the outcome? Thanks for your comments...

 

[Bondy]

Both lenses are very good, the only difference is one stop of light and the associated smaller depth of field from the 2.8. If you regularly shot in low light and want the smaller dof for say portraits then yes.

 

[Byker28i]

I have both. The f4 is small, light, easy to carry and optically brilliant.
The f2.8 (especially the IS) is heavier, larger, costs a lot more, is much more noticeable, especially if shooting candids.

However - it's brilliant, an extra stop can be useful but it's ability to isolate subjects and there's a certain clarity to it that means it's always in my bag

 

[LongLensPhotography]

it is BOKEH vs size and weight.

I have f/4 but nearly decided to f/2.8

 

[seriousrikk]

And of course, autofocus is much better using an F2.8 lens...

 

[KIPAX]

And of course, autofocus is much better using an F2.8 lens...

? explanation please?

 

[seriousrikk]

? explanation please?

Couple of reasons.

1. More light getting to the AF sensors is always going to improve autofocus - expecially when the light drops.

2. The 5D3 (Assuming this is what is meant by mk3 anyway...) has got a load more cross type sensors which work more accurately with lenses F2.8 or faster.

 

[pearce_jj]

2. The 5D3 (Assuming this is what is meant by mk3 anyway...) has got a load more cross type sensors which work more accurately with lenses F2.8 or faster.

I wonder though whether that is because it *needs* to be more accurate with an f2.8 (just a thought). The 2.8 is very conspicuous and heavy.

 

[bucz]

Or consider a new Tamron 70-200 2.8 with image stabilisation. I just bought one recently and it's brilliant. Sharp wide open and quick af and build quality is also great.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The 2.8 is very conspicuous and heavy.

You could get camouflage lens kit for not much money, but to be fair they look so good it is a huge bonus

 

[MadWoman]

I find my 70-200 2.8 (the Canon IS II version) neither conspicuous nor heavy. It is about the same size and weight as a non-zoomed 100-400mm, and even a girlie like me can use it one handed.

 

[KIPAX]

and even a girlie like me can use it one handed.

Are you ironing with the other ?


had to

 

[oscaroque]

Thank you guys, I really appreciate your comments.

 

[MadWoman]

Grr! Ironing!

Normally throwing a ball for the dog to get her running and jumping towards the camera.