Canon 70-200 f4 IS L * or * f2.8 non IS L

Gaz81

Gaz81

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,676
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
Right folks... i need your help.

I have the choice of the 70-200 f4 IS or the 70-200 f2.8 non IS.

I'm struggling to decide which one to go for!

Does the f4 IS give the edge over the f2.8?

I do a bit of low light work (some church wedding stuff from time to time).

I really can't push the extra 300+ for the f2.8 IS (not for a while anyway) but need a longer reach lens to compliment my 24-70L.

My body is a 5D Mk1 so it's not to shabby in high ISO.

Any thoughts people?

Cheers,

Gary
 
Hi Gary, I just joined this forum and saw your post. I use 5D classics for weddings and I have just sold my 70-200 f4L non IS because it never came out of the camera bag. I believe that the only 70-200 worth having for weddings is the 2.8 IS which like me you can't afford.

However, you could go for the 24-105 f4 IS which is what I use. I have tried the 24-70 and found that I dealy missed the 70-105 end of my lens. The IS is good too. Otherwise consider getting an 85mm 1.8 which I frequently use inside churches.
 
Gaz81 said:
Right folks... i need your help.

I have the choice of the 70-200 f4 IS or the 70-200 f2.8 non IS.

I'm struggling to decide which one to go for!

Does the f4 IS give the edge over the f2.8?

I do a bit of low light work (some church wedding stuff from time to time).

I really can't push the extra 300+ for the f2.8 IS (not for a while anyway) but need a longer reach lens to compliment my 24-70L.

My body is a 5D Mk1 so it's not to shabby in high ISO.

Any thoughts people?

Cheers,

Gary
Click to expand...

If your doing the low light / indoors then a fast lens is required, even though the 70-200mm f4 IS has latest IS technology, f4 just won't cut it for indoor / low light situations hand held, or it would struggle, unless your bumping the ISO quite abit and the f2.8 non IS might struggle as well, although ISO capability on the 5D are pretty good. It really depend on the situation your using it in, but I would go for the f2.8 if your doing more low light indoor shots

Have you thought about a faster prime instead, or do you specifically want a zoom. You could pickup a few primes for the £1000
 
I work in low light sometimes and IS gets dropped for f2.8 or lower
I would go for the 2.8 then. Or hire one for a day and see if it cuts the mustard
 
There is a big weight difference between the F4 IS and the F2.8- is this important? I have the F4 IS and it is awesomely sharp, and very versatile (works beautifully with quality extenders such as the Canon or Kenko Pro 300) but I take the point from others about 2.8 sometimes being a necessity.

If you decide to go for the 85mm 1.8 and want to sell your 50mm 1.4 I may be interested!
 
85mm f/1.8 for church. f/2.8 will give photos a better look, and needs far less light - so good for portraits and weddings, but for travelling and landscapes f/4 IS is no brainer.
 
I would like to know this as well...

I know F2.8 is one stop better than F4 in low light...

But does the IS make up for this 1 less stop...

:thumbs:
 
daugirdas said:
85mm f/1.8 for church. f/2.8 will give photos a better look, and needs far less light - so good for portraits and weddings, but for travelling and landscapes f/4 IS is no brainer.
Click to expand...

I think that's the point,the f4 is a very light lens and an easy travel companion. If your work is weddings then surely the weight is less of an issue and the priority is inside shots?

I'm waiting in for my f4 to arrive today, I went for it because I don't want to lug a big lens around outside and don't need it for indoors.
 
IS is useful if your subject isn't moving. If it is moving, and you're in low light, then you'll want the widest aperture you can get.

I recommend the 2.8 non IS over the f4. Good technique can assist with slow shutter speeds.

Also, you may want to consider the 135mm f2.0 which is cheaper and has rave reviews.
 
Weight isn't to much of an issue really.

What can you realisticly hold the f2.8 at at 200mm (hand held)? Would it have to be 200th or faster?

I thought the general rule of thumb was the min shutter speed was aprox the focal length?

And of course, the other consideration is IS won't stop people from moving!

Daveb99,

Only just got the 50mm f1.4 off Kerso mate! Not parting with it yet!
 
Gaz81 said:
Weight isn't to much of an issue really.

What can you realisticly hold the f2.8 at at 200mm (hand held)? Would it have to be 200th or faster?

I thought the general rule of thumb was the min shutter speed was aprox the focal length?

And of course, the other consideration is IS won't stop people from moving!

Daveb99,

Only just got the 50mm f1.4 off Kerso mate! Not parting with it yet!
Click to expand...

on 1.6x 1/200s is a threshold in my hands, your experience may vary depending how steady you are. A monopod could be a very cheap and reliable IS (get a LOOOONG one for comfortable shooting). If people are not running around, then 1/100s is normally fast enough.
Flash is another way to get the desired 1/200s (or use slow sync for special effects).
 
I mainly shot motorsport and went for the 2.8 non-IS over the f/4 for my use. I do a bit of event photography indoors, not too low light but often with the need of having the lens wide open at 200mm and handheld as low as 1/30th - hit rate can be a bit low but can help get the shot I wouldn't usually get the a f/4 version even with IS.
DB
 
Having used both of the IS versions I personally prefer (and have purchased) the F/4 IS. The F/4 is quite a bit smaller and lighter, it is tack sharp wide open and the IS gives a true 3-4 stops advantage. As my body offers good high-ISO performance I decided I could live without the extra stop in favor of more practicality and better sharpness. The bokeh on the F/2.8 is lovely though.
 
With the 2.8 IS II being announced, there should be a lot of second hand 2.8 IS around soon. A lot of people like the latest new gadgets.
 
I'd get the 2.8 as is won't stop them moving, and long lens technique can do a lot of the work it is only 200mm, accept the keeper rate and time your shooting with your breathing ;)
 
If you want to try a f/2.8 IS your welcome to pop round here. I went the whole hog becasue I didn't want to have the regret of buying the f/4 or non IS f/2.8 and then wishing I had got the IS f/2.8.

What about 2nd hand lens? there is one for sale in this thread
 
daugirdas said:
on 1.6x 1/200s is a threshold in my hands, your experience may vary depending how steady you are. A monopod could be a very cheap and reliable IS (get a LOOOONG one for comfortable shooting). If people are not running around, then 1/100s is normally fast enough.
Flash is another way to get the desired 1/200s (or use slow sync for special effects).
Click to expand...

flash in a church wedding??
 
The current f4 & f2.8 IS versions are equally capable (handholdable) in low light (faster vs better IS) but f2.8 is better for stopping motion.

Interestingly I can hand hold the 200mm 2.8 prime at slower speeds than you might imagine as it is so light 1/60 is doable easily!

For churches neither f4 or f2.8 is ideal. Go fast prime
 
philthejuggler said:
The current f4 & f2.8 IS versions are equally capable (handholdable) in low light (faster vs better IS) but f2.8 is better for stopping motion.

Interestingly I can hand hold the 200mm 2.8 prime at slower speeds than you might imagine as it is so light 1/60 is doable easily!

For churches neither f4 or f2.8 is ideal. Go fast prime
Click to expand...

I've always got the 50mm f1.4 for really bad light
 
I have the F2.8 IS 70-200 and it's far better for indoor pictures than my F4 lens (28-105). I take photos at indoor hockey matches for my team and i can get the shutter speed down to 1/200ish indoors at ISO 800 (no flash) with the F2.8 which is far better for freezing the action
 
The problem with getting the non-IS versions (either F/2.8 or F/4) is that you will always yearn for the IS upgrade. Most people tend to stand quite still (pose) at Weddings, and preventing camera shake may be more benificial than the ability to freeze motion, especially if you shoot without a monopod/tripod. With IS, most handheld shots taken at 1/30th to 1/60th will be sharp.
 
Orville said:
The problem with getting the non-IS versions (either F/2.8 or F/4) is that you will always yearn for the IS upgrade. Most people tend to stand quite still (pose) at Weddings, and preventing camera shake may be more benificial than the ability to freeze motion, especially if you shoot without a monopod/tripod. With IS, most handheld shots taken at 1/30th to 1/60th will be sharp.
Click to expand...

Very true... :thinking:
 
i've got the non-IS 2.8 and the weight isn't that much of an issue. it is true though that you'll be yearning for the IS upgrade. I just cant see the keeprate being all that good in a wedding situation. Like people have said, with the mk2 coming out there should be some good mk1's hitting the market soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top