Which lens would you pick?

[Chaz Photos]

2.8, purely because im a wedding photographer so I need the faster lenses.

and you have the non IS one?

 

[Gary.D]

and you have the non IS one?

Yes, works a treat for me.

 

[CT]

But I have not put the 2.8 IS in this question

Ah OK. Well there's 2.3 ounce difference in weight with the non- IS being lighter, so the same advantages apply, with the weight difference not being very significant.

 

[Chaz Photos]

Ah OK. Well there's 2.3 ounce difference in weight with the non- IS being lighter, so the same advantages apply, with the weight difference not being very significant.

But lots of pounds in money

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight
3.3" x 7.6", 2.9 lbs. / 84.6mm x 193.6mm, 1310g £899

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight
3.4" x 7.8", 3.24 lbs. / 86.2mm x 197mm, 1470g £1229

 

[350wedge]

But lots of pounds in money

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight
3.3" x 7.6", 2.9 lbs. / 84.6mm x 193.6mm, 1310g £1229

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight
3.4" x 7.8", 3.24 lbs. / 86.2mm x 197mm, 1470g £899

Shirley the prices are the wrong way round... £899 for the non IS and £1299 for the IS...

 

[Chaz Photos]

Shirley the prices are the wrong way round... £899 for the non IS and £1299 for the IS...

OPS yes sorry

 

[akr]

I'd go for the 4 IS. Have the non IS, and slightly shaky hands so can see the benefit. I find that, my 40D and a couple of extra lenses is plentty heavy for me.

I'm just a hobbiest and for me the lens being lighter would be a big plus.

I've not tried f2.8 and don't want to in case it corrupts me into wanting one!

 

[crumble]

2.8 for me

 

[sheridant]

great question - the diffused backgrounds make it a no brainer - but I still want the IS

 

[Chaz Photos]

Well OK I have now gone and bought a 2.8 IS
It should be with me on Monday
Thanks for all your post

 

[350wedge]

Well done, you really wont be disappointed.... Cracking lens

 

[pearce_jj]

But I have not put the 2.8 IS in this question

...

Well OK I have now gone and bought a 2.8 IS

You gotta love this forum..., one more bankruptcy to add to the count

 

[Chaz Photos]

no the EX cant get her hands on it

 

[wegotitugetit]

i was asking the same questions a while back although i got the 70-200 f4 non is i would certainly get the is version
as for the f2.8 i kept get told the same answer when would you really use the 2.8 side

 

[Davie]

I voted the f4IS but Want the 2.8IS

I gave up golf because I was doing my back in, thought I'd take up a nice quiet, easy, cheaper, lightweight hobby such as photography.

Doh!! :bang:

 

[pearce_jj]

as for the f2.8 i kept get told the same answer when would you really use the 2.8 side

Always, for me!

 

[68lbs]

Always, for me!

Me too! Well... a lot of the time anyways.

 

[Steve2]

View Poll Results: Which one lens would you pick?
70-200 L 2.8 81 57.86%
70-200 L F4 IS 59 42.14%
Voters: 140. You have already voted on this poll

 

[Chaz Photos]

I voted the f4IS but Want the 2.8IS

I gave up golf because I was doing my back in, thought I'd take up a nice quiet, easy, cheaper, lightweight hobby such as photography.

Doh!! :bang:

:bonk: try caring my full bag and not the day one take a look at what in it.

 

[Vertigo1]

Well I had the same dilemma two years ago and ended up going for the F4 IS.

But I recently traded up to the F2.8 IS. Draw your own conclusions from that