70 200 F4 usm

mercmanuk

mercmanuk

Messages
1,822
Edit My Images
Yes
is the 70 200 F4 usm sharper than the IS version, a standard one is around 450 500 mark but the IS is 650 800 mark.

this lens is for my son who has the 450D he has the standard 18 55 is and is looking for a good zoom/telephoto for general reach and :thumbs:street cred :shrug:, he has £600 burning a hole in his pocket.


what would you recommend please

Regards Merc
 
This is my opinion ok,i have the 70-200 f/4 is, its great lens and very sharp,i have used the non is (a friends)and as long as you use a tripod or have very steady hands the non is would be good,but i personally prefer the is version (its an age thing lol),

regards,
john.
 
Got my 70-200 f4 for £380. You don't need IS, if you have the money to spend then a f2.8 non is would be better than f4 is.
 
the IS is widely regarding as being sharper than the non IS, and is arguably the sharpest of all the 70-200s Canon offers.
 
trencheel303 said:
the IS is widely regarding as being sharper than the non IS, and is arguably the sharpest of all the 70-200s Canon offers.
Click to expand...

Why is this? Are the optics different in the IS? I cant imagine the IS is different in any way other than having IS surely?
 
trencheel303 said:
the IS is widely regarding as being sharper than the non IS, and is arguably the sharpest of all the 70-200s Canon offers.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember the reverse as being the common belief...

However, the difference would be negligible unless you pixel peep. I know I prefer having IS even though I don't on this lens (I have the f4 non IS version which is very sharp. even hand held.

The non IS version is also very lightweight.

Steve
 
Andy said:
Got my 70-200 f4 for £380. You don't need IS, if you have the money to spend then a f2.8 non is would be better than f4 is.
Click to expand...

Perhaps in your case you don't need IS but that doesn't mean to say that other people wouldn't require it.
A key benefit of IS is being able to get a shot at a lower shutter speed when compared to the non IS version of the lens.
 
trencheel303 said:
the IS is widely regarding as being sharper than the non IS, and is arguably the sharpest of all the 70-200s Canon offers.
Click to expand...

i tend to agree


Skyline On Fire said:
Why is this? Are the optics different in the IS? I cant imagine the IS is different in any way other than having IS surely?
Click to expand...

i have herd different optics to compliment the IS ??

Jelster said:
I seem to remember the reverse as being the common belief...

However, the difference would be negligible unless you pixel peep. I know I prefer having IS even though I don't on this lens (I have the f4 non IS version which is very sharp. even hand held.

The non IS version is also very lightweight.

Steve
Click to expand...


this is also what i have found, say if your cameras in Al servo it will focus on a fast moving object such sports, will this compensate for the lack of IS?.possibly not but ???

Using one shot with the center focus point will provide the fastest possible focus for that reason, most sensitive point, least thinking, is this as good as IS for sports shots.

what shots would you turn IS off for ????

Regards merc
 
trencheel303 said:
the IS is widely regarding as being sharper than the non IS, and is arguably the sharpest of all the 70-200s Canon offers.
Click to expand...
I think the f/2.8 MKII has wrestled its crown away now (especially on full frame bodies)

Skyline On Fire said:
Why is this? Are the optics different in the IS? I cant imagine the IS is different in any way other than having IS surely?
Click to expand...

The f/4 IS optics were re-designed and not simply an IS version of the original.

Bob
 
I agree with Bob, until the arrival of the new 70-200 2.8 IS, the F4 IS was the latest design, and purported to be the best of the bunch, That said the whole family of 70-200 is pretty damn good. I choose the IS version, as the IS makes it that much more useable handheld when conditions are not ideal. I love it and don't regret saving a bit longer for the IS, The 2.8 I discounted as too heavy for lugging around all day, Now I am used to my 100-400, it's probably less of an issue, But I'm not thinking about changing up anytime soon.
 
bobiscuit said:
I got a 70-200mm f4L a couple of weeks ago. Sharpness wide open is basically perfect. I can't see any improvement at narrower apertures and I'm a chronic pixel-peeper!
Click to expand...

Hi Bob that's the kind of recommendation i need, i will give the feedback to my son thanks,

Merc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top