70-200 f/4, will i regret not buying the f/2.8 ?

mrgubby

mrgubby

Messages
7,987
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm getting closer & closer to replacing my Tamron 28-300 , it's done good service but I'm getting fussier with my shots and my son wants to borrow it for the 300D. I was going to buy a Sigma 75-300 for him but it makes more sense to give him the Tamron & buy myself a new toy :clap:

Most of my photography is Motorsport / Wildlife / Football so I don't see that I would make much use of 'IS' as the subjects twitch more than me.....

This leaves me with 3 lenses to go with my 30D (as far as I can see)

Canon 70-200 f/4
Canon 70-200 f/2.8
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8

Will f/2.8 be a lot more use than f/4 and if f/2.8 is worth it would the Canon be that much better than a Sigma. (I'd need to justify the £150 price difference to Mrs G :bat:)

Right now I'm leaning towards the f/4 + 1.4tc from that nice Kerso chap but I can't resist a good dither :bang:

I know that either of these lenses would give me a significant improvement in image quality on my existing kit but which will give me the best value for money / fit my use ?


Thanks for any help / guidance

Brian

Ps . After looking through previous posts we could probably save TPF bandwidth by making this a sticky :D

PPs. Anybody going to Whipsnade next week with one of these lenses I could fondle (in a non pervy way) ???
 
I'll have my 70-200/2.8 IS L if you want a quick fondle

(did I just say that out loud? :confused:)
 
I love my F2.8 70-200mm i never tihnk would a F4 been just as good, but if i'd got the f4 i'd have thought, what if i'd bought the F2.8.

F.28 is good for me, but i could imagine the weight would bother a few people.
 
All I can suggest is that you pm dod and ask about the Sigma vs the Canon L's.....I think you be surprised at his answer;)
 
There's always another "just out of reach" :D
Go for the 2.8 if you can afford it don't forget you lose a stop with a 1.4tc
So, if you like I will speak to Mrs G and tell her that you absolutely must have the 2.8 + 1.4 tc
BTW You can also fondle mine if you like but its also the 2.8 IS version :D
 
I was in the same predicament towards the end of last year and eventually went for the canon 2.8L IS. Its an absolute cracker and the extra stop comes in real handy in low light. Do you ever shoot footy at night in in poor light? Im pretty sure you will have done so with motorsport. As already said ask dod as he has had the F4 and f2.8 canons and the sigma too :)
 
i went thru the same thing, in the end with the prime, 200mm L 2.8. Its so light and doesnt draw attention to itself. IQ is :O
 
To buy or not buy that's the question. I went through the same should I ,shouldn't I scenario.

Unfortunately only you can really decide what to buy the F4 or F2.8. Simple question. Do you need the extra stop. I decided I didn't and went for the F4. On the plus side it's a light lens and a joy to use. It's also a lot cheaper. Mine didn't have the IS ( it wasn't available at the time) but I can hand hold it at 1/200 no problem. It's also cheaper than the others.

Whichever lens you choose it will compliment the 30D and stand you in good stead if you go to a large sensor.
 
I've got the f2.8 and wont be swapping. The only downside is the weight.
Stop it down to f4 or f5.6 and its at least as sharp as the f4 version, but it does f2.8

If weight isnt your issue then save and buy the best.
 
I've got a F4 IS but I did try out a 2.8 IS before I made the jump and bought what I ended up with :)

The only reason I ended up with the F4 was the weight of the 2.8 to be honest, I've enough to carry for now without that too! ;)

That say I think whichever one you get you wont' be disappointed! ;)

Matt
 
I have the f4 and can only comment on that, it's an awesome lens !, if you need the extra stop to 2.8 bump up the ASA and run it through Noise Ninja afterwards !, thats what I do and I've never been dissapointed yet, a lovely light easy tyo handle lens that never fails to amaze me with it's quality.

Having said all that I'd love to try the f2.8 IS verision, but honestly I can't imagine it being any better than the f4.

Alan
 
Thanks for the link, I have the same choice to make as the OP but I think i've come up with a plan, get the F/4 now, and when i can afford it, get the 2.8IS. But also keep the F4. That way i have a walkabout lens for this range and have the bigger faster 2.8 when i need it indoors or when the weather is bad or something. Considering what a bargain the F4 version is compare to the 2.8 IS, it's worth keeping i think.
 
If you are shooting football then go for the f2.8. Before I left the UK I was shooting football every weekend during the season with a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and around this time of year I sometimes struggled with shutter speeds, if I'd of had a f4 I wouldn't have been able to capture half the shots I did.

As for the Sigma/Canon debate I can't help much there as I am a Nikon man. I have recently just purchased the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR and it is miles ahead of Sigma in terms of IQ. I imagine this would be the case with Canon too. I can't wait to come back to the UK and shoot some football with it.
 
Like sadlybrokeboy says, consider the weight and size of the 2.8..
I have both, and am keeping the f4, as the 2.8 is way to big and heavy for me.
I'll be looking into what to sell it for soon, but am not sure yet when I will be back in London, where the 2.8 is languishing..


Forgot to mention - both mine have IS, and I feel it is well worth the extra for me
 
Hum - I have the 70-200 F4 mainly because of weight and cost, but would consider the F4 IS version also as that is supposed to be one of Canon's top lenses.

I've not had too many problems with the F4 that a higher ISO didn't cure, especially with my 40D, but the 2.8 would be interesting to have for depth of field at times.

You're right about this time of year though. The light is very poor - especially with the fog taking time to lift etc.

As for weight - for me the F4 is great and it's the lens I'll take everywhere. I also have the 100-400 but because of the weight it's the one that gets most left behind. I tend to only take it to motorsport events now.
 
Thanks for the replies / comments (y)

It looks like the concensus is go for the f/2.8 if possible and that the Sigma is pretty much the equal to the Canon .

Can anybody give me an idea of the expected UK prices for these lenses (i've been burned before on import tax :bang:)

thanks

Brian
 
I think the fact that these threads always end up saying much the same thing, tells you all you need to know.

The £1000+ f2.8 IS can be just as good as the £450 ish basic f4.

If you can afford the extra and don't mind the weight or just plain need the extra stop, then of course it's s no brainer. If not, the little brother is not going to disappoint or leave you wishing.
 
I've owned all the ones you're looking at, they were actually all in the bag for a short time :p

My preference is, in order

Canon F4
Sigma
Canon F2.8 IS

None of them are bad, the reason I stuck to the Canon F2.8 was simply the weather proofing which the other two don't have.
 
All I'll add is that an f:2.8 will be better suited if used with a telecon should you need the extra length occasionally. Only you can really say whether you need the extra stop it will give you though.
 
Im currently making the decision that everyone has made at least once in their photographic life.

f/4 IS or Non-IS:thinking:

And if thats your choice, then i got some really good advice for 40D users.
High ISO on the 40D is SOOOOO good then it negates the 4 stop increase the IS version gives you (especially for £250 more)

As for the OP, then can you try them out first. The thing that is stopping me getting the 2.8 is firstly price and that i dont want anything lower than f/4 for the photos i take. Plus the 2.8 is very heavy (held it once and was surprised how heavy it actually was)

Good luck with your decision.
 
I originally bought the f4 non IS version. It's an excellent lens, but I rented the 2.8 IS for a I was shooting, wedding for comparison. I was concerned about the heavy weight but after a couple of minutes I was used to it. As far as performance is concerned I was delighted with the 2.8- so much so that I haven't used the f4 since. It will be appearing on Ebay any day now and the money is going towards the 2.8 IS. There was no contest for my purposes.
 
Always buy the best glass you can afford... Buy good glass and then you won't be constantly upgrading and spending more money :)

Pete
 
icecavern said:
Always buy the best glass you can afford...
Click to expand...

But what constitutes "best"? For some it's maximum aperture, for others image quality, for others build but for some it could be size and weight. There's no point having the best quality lens in the world if it stays at home all the time because it's either to big or too heavy to comfortably carry around with you. Invariably, it's not a question of deciding which lens is best, but more you have to decide what compromise you're going to be happiest living with.
 
:agree:

Northern Nikon has hit the nail on the head there. :)
 
Well I've always found the best quality glass is the top models in the ranges, which also happen to be the fastest aperture too. I'm purely talking about optical quality as "best" as best glass is best glass.

If you're, quite rightly, saying that some people aren't prepared to carry around heavy lenses then they're not buying best glass, they are buying a compromise. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you are aware that's what you're doing.

One thing I've always found though with enthusiasts ( of any kind not just photography ) is that they want the best, but don't buy it, then eventually upgrade which costs them more in the long run.

Just my 2p :)
 
I think you're just describing what's best for you. I could use my Nikkor 200m f:2 all the time. It's my 'best' glass at that focal range interms of build, features, image quality but I only bought because I am happy to live with the coompromises it brings and that is it is bloody big and bloody heavy. But it's only my "best" lens for certain shoots, for others it's an 80-200mm f:2.8. The majority of photographers here would have no need for a 200mm f:2 and it would simply be too much for them. As a result something like an 80-200 or 70-200 zoom would be the "best" lens for them.

You have to define what's best for you as an individual before you can buy it, and it's not always the top models.
 
The "best" is clearly the 2.8 IS as you can have f/2.8 OR f/4 and it has IS or not IS, so it covers all bases, but its the price and weight stopping everyone getting it. If we were all built like brick **** houses and had equally as big wallets, everyone would get that lens.

For me, im getting the f4 Non-IS simply so i can buy a 1.4 extender and a load of filters for my lenses and still have change for what i would spend on a f4 IS. Plus as i said above, the 4 stops can be easily done with the capabilities of ISO (probably never even going above 800 even indoor)
 
Plus as i said above, the 4 stops can be easily done with the capabilities of ISO
Click to expand...

But just think what you could shoot with improved ISO delivery AND IS????? :D

I should say that I personally have neither.
 
dazzajl said:
But just think what you could shoot with improved ISO delivery AND IS????? :D

I should say that I personally have neither.
Click to expand...

As above states, it would be nice, but i cant afford an extra £250 on a lens when i need to buy filters and an extender. Woudl rather have that than IS for another £250.

I could in theory buy Non-IS and get a Sigma 10-20 ASWELL. Now thats the difference.
 
I had to make the same choice last year and went for the canon F2.8 yes it was more money but I think it was worth it and as has been said I to would after a while said I wonder how good the 2.8 might have been :p if I hadn't bought it and knowing me I would probably of ended up getting it later and losing money, have you looked for second hand??
 
Well I ended up with the Sigma 70-200 DG EC HSM Macro and it started raining the second I came out of the shop.


Prepare yourselves for the next Ice Age :(
 
mrgubby said:
Well I ended up with the Sigma 70-200 DG EC HSM Macro and it started raining the second I came out of the shop.


Prepare yourselves for the next Ice Age :(
Click to expand...

Well done on the purchase Mr G (y) BUT you can leave the friggin' thing at home Sat, if its gonna do that everytime you get it out :D
 
mrgubby said:
Well I ended up with the Sigma 70-200 DG EC HSM Macro and it started raining the second I came out of the shop.
Click to expand...

Good choice, best of both worlds really, better value than the canon option and you gain the F2.8 over the F4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top