canon 70-200 f4 IS vs NonIS

titch124

titch124

Messages
341
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
been looking at the prices for these. although the IS would be nice, i can't decide if its worth the extra £300

whats your opinions?
 
titch124 said:
been looking at the prices for these. although the IS would be nice, i can't decide if its worth the extra £300

whats your opinions?
Click to expand...

Its not just IS you get, its also weather sealing.
 
Depends what you want it for, but from experience of my non-IS 70-200/2.8 I'd say IS would be very handy; especially if it's being used on a crop body.
 
I paid the extra for IS, if that answers your question ;)
 
I only had my s/h non IS f4 for a few weeks before I decided to go for the IS version.
 
I would always go for IS,i think its brilliant.:)
 
You also get circular aperture blades, and 20 glass elements in 15 groups, rather than 16 in 13. The design is therefore more complicated, and hints why the price is a lot more. In the real world the picture quality is not noticably different -unless the lighting conditions are poor - then the IS comes into it's own.
 
The non-IS is great lens and nothing can beat it for the price. If money is tight, you will not be disappointed.

However, the IS version is sharper (I noticed the difference), weather sealed, and it has IS:). I actually preferred the F/4 IS to the F/2.8 IS after testing them both out for a day. People say that IS does not help with a moving subject, but thay are wrong. Mode 2 IS works brilliantly with indoor sports and panning shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top