Upgrade to Canon 70-200L F4 (non-IS)?

Messages
549
Edit My Images
Yes
I have the F4 non-IS 70-200 and I'm considering an upgrade. I pretty much use this as an all round lens (wildlife, sports, events, etc) for anything that needs more than 50mm.

The 2.8 IS is the obvious upgrade but what's it like in terms of weight/size? A quick google suggests that it's twice as heavy (700g vs 1.4 kg)? Is that really that noticeable? I also can't seem to find dimension comparisons at the smallest length (e.g. for carrying around in bag).

Anything else I should be considering? Any help/advice appreciated :)
 
Last edited:
I have the F4 non-IS 7-200 and I'm considering an upgrade. I pretty much use this as an all round lens (wildlife, sports, events, etc) for anything that needs more than 50mm.

The 2.8 IS is the obvious upgrade but what's it like in terms of weight/size? A quick google suggests that it's twice as heavy (700g vs 1.4 kg)? Is that really that noticeable? I also can't seem to find dimension comparisons at the smallest length (e.g. for carrying around in bag).

Anything else I should be considering? Any help/advice appreciated :)

Is it noticeable - yes especially if you use the F4 for a while and then try the F2.8 straight away, you do notice the extra weight, especially at the front of the camera ...

Is it a problem - well only you know you that - depends on how long you are carrying / using the camera / lens, a mate of mine felt it was more balanced (but heavier) with his camera...
The F2.8 also has a larger body.

Anything else to consider - it's a belter of a lens (mk II), very quick to focus very nice to use, has IS (which yours doesn't at present), has a tripod mount bracket on the lens barrel for balance if required. Oh and costs a lot of money...

Hope this is of some help :)
 
I'm going through the same myself. The sigma has some very good write ups, almost half the price. They both look huge, nearly a foot long, so not one of being inconspicuous!
 
Is the lens itself significantly larger/bulkier?

Unfortunately I don't have both lenses to be able to compare.

At a rough estimate, I would say the F2.8 is approx twice as fat - if that makes sense...

Hope this helps :)
 
They are noticably fatter. F-ratio is just focal length divided by aperture, so the same focal length at a faster f-ratio must have a wider aperture. Add to that the need to squeeze in IS electronics...
 
F-ratio is just focal length divided by aperture, so the same focal length at a faster f-ratio must have a wider aperture.

That's not really true though is it? It assumes the rest of the optical design is the same between them when it rarely is...
 
True, had a brief brain fart there. I'm used to dealing with telescopes, so multi-element designs didnt occur to me.
Still, it is fatter... lol
 
I have the F/4L IS and a good mate of mine has the F/2.8L IS. The 2.8 is significantly heavier but a very economical way of reducing any potential discomfort is to use a BlackRapid camera strap which sits across your chest and also leaves you hands free. If you keep the tripod mount attached to the lens you can alternatively attach the lens to the BlackRapid strap (which I sometimes do). I use the 'Sport' strap. You can buy them in the UK.

http://www.blackrapid.com/products/sport

I hope this helps :)
 
I had the 2.8 version, for me it was too big and weighty when carrying about all day..
Bought the f4 is and it provided equally good photos at a much more useable size
 
I've recently bought the f4 IS and was considering the 2.8 but everyone said it depends what you're shooting.

If you're not shooting in the dark (low light) then you're likely to not need the 2.8 over the 4. I can't speak for the difference between IS and non IS but would that alone feel like an upgrade for you? I shoot mainly motor sport with it & can't imagine not having the IS.

Following what RedRobin said below, I guess it's a case of does f4 allow you to shoot all that you want, as easily as you want? The 2.8 is a fair price bump.
 
Last edited:
If you're not shooting in the dark then you're likely to not need the 2.8 over the 4.

....What a camera sensor reads as 'dark' is somewhat different than the human eye and certainly many animals eye. The 2.8 will offer a definite advantage how much light reaches the sensor and hence offers 'faster' camera settings in low light conditions such as dawn/dusk wildlife shots for example.
 
I have the 70-200 F4 (non is) and also the 2.8 IS. Great lens, worthwhile upgrade, but you mentioned wildlife, sport etc. Have you considered the 100-400?
 
I do a lot of wildlife and the 70-200is f4 gets some great shots but only in its limits. A 100- 400 would be better for longer distances. You could always look at sigma a tampon
 
I mostly shoot motorsport and always turn IS off.

The f/2.8 takes a 77mm filter compared to the f/4 67mm filter so its physically a bit bulkier.

If you want to simulate the weight, add a bag with 700g of something (sand / flour / sugar / water) and hold that in the hand you support your lens with and take a few shots.
 
The other thing I guess is to borrow or rent and try for yourself. Where abouts are you in the country?
 
Tampon / Tamron both do the job they are made for I guess .;):(
Good old predictive text !
Well it's put a :) On my face this morning !
 
Last edited:
Tampon / Tamron both do the job they are made for I guess .;):(
Good old predictive text !
Well it's put a :) On my face this morning !

....I like putting smiles on people's faces. Life is what you make it and there's no point going around with a long face :) Glad you enjoyed the vid.
 
Gr8 start to the day when something makes you laugh or :):ty:
 
I have the F/4L IS ...use a BlackRapid camera strap...use the 'Sport' strap...
Robin, do you attach your BR to the camera or the lens collar? I don't have a telephoto lens (yet) but looking at BR straps for the 70D.
 
Robin, do you attach your BR to the camera or the lens collar? I don't have a telephoto lens (yet) but looking at BR straps for the 70D.

....Both, but not at the same time! To explain that:

I have the supplied BR FASTENR on my camera body and have bought FASTENR TRIPOD (FR-T1) 'loops' which substitute into my Manfrotto RC2 tripod plates and each of my telephoto (and 100mm Macro) lenses has the RC2 plate always attached to the lens collar which in turn is always attached to the lens.

Consequently I always have a choice:

A) - Camera body, with or without lens, attached to my BR strap. And I also strongly recommend their LOCKSTAR.

B) - A lens with RC2 plate and FASTENR FR-T1 can be attached to my BR strap and the camera body can be quickly swopped between one lens on the BR strap and another lens already attached to my tripod.

Here is BlackRapid's accessories page link: http://www.blackrapid.com/products#accessories

So typically I will have my 100mm Macro lens at the ready on my tripod (and easy to carry over my shoulder with it mounted) and my 300mm lens mounted on my 70D ready on my BR strap.

I hope this helps. Now back to reading over 500 pages of guidebook for my 7D Mark II body which arrived on Wednesday.
 
Stick the book in your camera bag for that moment you're out and about and cannot remember how to...
 
Stick the book in your camera bag for that moment you're out and about and cannot remember how to...

....If it's me you are referring to, the printed Basic Instruction Manual doesn't cover the very extensive Autofocus system settings that I'm still digesting on the PDF. Anyway, quite a few other TP guys will be out shooting with their 7D2 tomorrow and will post images.
 
....If it's me you are referring to, the printed Basic Instruction Manual doesn't cover the very extensive Autofocus system settings that I'm still digesting on the PDF. Anyway, quite a few other TP guys will be out shooting with their 7D2 tomorrow and will post images.
Yup - you :D

Don't you have the little book that comes with it? The 5d mk3 one was reasonable in description of all the functions, including the autofocus.
 
Yup - you :D

Don't you have the little book that comes with it? The 5d mk3 one was reasonable in description of all the functions, including the autofocus.

....Yes I do have the little book which shipped in the box - It is called 'Basic Instruction Manual'. It is quite well described and illustrated but I prefer to customise my settings before I settle down to stalking wildlife and shooting. The programmable Autofocus system is new to me and I want to fully digest it. Besides, there'll be plenty of 7D2 images posted by other owners in the next few days. Furthermore, I'll probably only shoot JPEG (at ISO 6400 out of curiosity) to begin with until Apple update their OS RAW compatibility. I'm beginning to wish that I hadn't told anyone that I got mine early!

This is off topic too.
 
Off topic, true, but I did answer your original question and suggest the 100-400 too :)

Things I like 70-200 f4,light, quality image
70-200f2.8is, heavier, but i don't notice really, at f2.8 with sport you can really isolate the player / subject and the is works well
100-400 is great for close ups, longer distances, again as heavy as the 70-200 f2.8 but I don't notice. Push pull zoom works really well for Motorsport as you can zoom quickly.
 
Back
Top