Which Canon 70-200?
- Thread starter bogmanfan
- Start date
markmullen
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,726
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
I was in the same position, I went for the F4 IS, my reasoning being it is weather sealed (and has been drenched and frozen since buying) and also I don't often shoot wide open so I thought I would benefit from the IS more than the extra stop. Also it is a lot lighter, quite handy when lugging a 1D2 around a rally for a whole day or Le Mans for 24 hours.
turnpike
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 244
- Name
- Carl
- Edit My Images
- No
I had the same choice and I just looked at all my shots and realised that I often use wider than f/4.0 so decided I wouldn't enjoy that one. I also rented a 2.8 to make my mind up. Nothing quite like actually having the lens for a few days or more to really work out what is best for you. That said, 200mm without IS could be tough if it's not outdoors and plenty light.
pooley
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,017
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The IS lens probably won't be worth getting for what you want to photograph, as with nature and sport you'll invariably be shooting moving subjects which need a faster shutter speed to capture the action, which renders the IS pretty much irrelevant.
The f2.8 all day long IMHO
The f2.8 all day long IMHO
- Messages
- 1,918
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i can handhold my 70-200 non is at 1/160 and get a sharp shot. when i first got it, i was keeping above 1/500 to be safe so after some practice you will get better.
if you're a sucker for bokeh (like me) the 70-200 2.8 will not disappoint.
i'll give you a few examples i've taken recently, i just love the creamy defocused backgrounds it produces.
if you're a sucker for bokeh (like me) the 70-200 2.8 will not disappoint.
i'll give you a few examples i've taken recently, i just love the creamy defocused backgrounds it produces.
Last edited:
Scarecrow
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,662
- Name
- Derek
- Edit My Images
- Yes
People often say that they choose the f/4 over the f/2.8 as they rarely shoot wider than f/4. What they forget is that if shooting at f/4 with the f/4, your shooting wide open. If shooting at f/4 with the f/2.8, your shooting I stop down from wide open.
Everyone egrees that the Canon 70-200 range is a good set of lenses, but most would also agree that a lens performs slightly better when stopped down slightly. The other advantage is that the f/2.8 will give a slightly brighter viewfinder.
Ultimately the choice is down to the individual, and in this case you need to weigh up which matters most to you, IS or the extra stop.
p.s. Some great images there Cuthbert.
Everyone egrees that the Canon 70-200 range is a good set of lenses, but most would also agree that a lens performs slightly better when stopped down slightly. The other advantage is that the f/2.8 will give a slightly brighter viewfinder.
Ultimately the choice is down to the individual, and in this case you need to weigh up which matters most to you, IS or the extra stop.
p.s. Some great images there Cuthbert.
seriousrikk
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,881
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have found my 70-200mm F4 IS to be at least as shar wide open as the F2.8 IS was stopped down to F4. Most lenses will improve when stopped down but the Canon 70-200mm F4 lenses are blisteringly sharp wide open so make it quite an unfair comparison!
- Messages
- 1,918
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i did some quite extensive research on both when i was looking at buying, tbh, sharpness between them is pretty much a non-issue, they're all great lenses. it comes down to really a few simple things:
1) do you need f2.8?
2) do you need IS?
i'd love both, but could only afford one or other. i went for the f2.8 lens. you can't make a f4 a 2.8 lens, but you can (as i have found) learn better technique for handholding you won't get anything like the advantage you'll get with IS, but it's not as bad as you think.
to be honest, slower than 1/160, i find subject movement to become a problem anyway, especially with portraits and children.
1) do you need f2.8?
2) do you need IS?
i'd love both, but could only afford one or other. i went for the f2.8 lens. you can't make a f4 a 2.8 lens, but you can (as i have found) learn better technique for handholding you won't get anything like the advantage you'll get with IS, but it's not as bad as you think.
to be honest, slower than 1/160, i find subject movement to become a problem anyway, especially with portraits and children.
Last edited:
Can't really tell you how good it is yet though, not had much chance to use it !