Canon 70-200mm F 2.8 IS V Canon 70-200mm F 4.0

C

Cuddy

Messages
4,410
Edit My Images
No
Two choices on my list Pros and Cons guys, i would be grateful for your input.
 
This has to be THE most discussed topic on the TP board.

Do a little search, spend two weeks reading and digesting all the data, buy the f4 and spend the rest on beer.

Job done. :D
 
dazzajl said:
Do a little search, spend two weeks reading and digesting all the data, buy the f4 and spend the rest on beer.

Job done. :D
Click to expand...

Dazzajl forgot to mention....you'll need the beer to drown your sorrows when you realise that you should have gone for the f/2.8 instead...job done again:D:D

Bob
 
you'll need the beer to ease your aching muscles after lugging the 2.8 around all day when you didn't use it lower than F4 anyway :clap:
 
you'll need the beer to drown your sorrows when you realise that you should have gone for the f/2.8 instead
Click to expand...

Could well be Bob but will there be enough money left over to buy any?? :LOL::LOL:

People don't realise that this could be the biggest decision they ever make. :thinking::bonk::LOL:
 
dazzajl said:
Could well be Bob but will there be enough money left over to buy any?? :LOL::LOL:

People don't realise that this could be the biggest decision they ever make. :thinking::bonk::LOL:
Click to expand...

Tell me about it.....

I got the f/4 (non-IS) first.....then got the f/2.8 (non-IS) but kept the f/4 (Non-IS) and now I've got the f/2.8 IS and the f/4 (non-IS) but offloaded the f/2.8 (non-IS).

I think RMSD sponsor Canon to make 4 versions.....:puke:

Bob
 
Both are superb lenses, this comes down to budget imo!

f4
cons:

slower than 2.8
no IS ( as you didnt mention it will be the is version) makes this in theory
even more slower

pro's:

cheaper than 2.8
lighter than 2.8
just as sharp as 2.8


and vice versa for the 2.8
 
Cuddy said:
Two choices on my list Pros and Cons guys, i would be grateful for your input.
Click to expand...
Go for the f2.8 but without the IS. Cheaper. I spent ages making my mind up and bought the 2.8 without IS and have not regreted the decision for one minute. I have another lens (28-135 f3.5 - 5.6) and feel its just too slow now. The extra stops make a world of difference.

So I'd say f2.8 everytime. Go for it my friend, go for it.
 
Sorry its gonna be the IS F4 if thats my final choice, could use the spare cash to by a Bigma.
Its a once in a lifetime purchase as i will never have this kind of money again, so i havr got to be sure
 
Kerso's doing the f4 IS at a great price ATM, I know cos I just got one and am soooo haaaapppyyy :D
 
Cuddy said:
Sorry........
Click to expand...

There is no bad or wrong choice but you just need to take the time to see which best suits the shots that you want. For my needs the extra stop and the IS would be just wasted money but for some a lens without both would be completely useless.
 
By the way are you guys happy with your items purchased from Kerso he seems very cheap?
 
Cuddy said:
By the way are you guys happy with your items purchased from Kerso he seems very cheap?
Click to expand...

I've purchased many lenses and a camera body from him in the last 18months with no problems. Thinking about a 70-200 F4 IS next.. and will be purchasing from Kerso if I go for it. :)
 
sorry to sound really stupid but what is IS?:thinking:
 
Ah, thanks... now i do feel like a fool :confused:
 
thanks (y)

if you dont ask you dont get i suppose
 
I bought my 70-200 2.8 IS from Kerso in December and would definately buy off him again.
 
Never used Kerso, though i have hears he provides a good service, any problems with repairs by Canon ? as the equipment comes from the USA i believe.
 
I had my 50mm f1.4 repaired under warrenty (by fixation) without any problems, the reciept comes with a UK address, so even though the lenses didn't come through Canon UK they have been sold in the UK so they are fine for warrenty (and cashback!!!)
 
Was thinking about the F4 until I had a go with the 2.8 at the weekend. I'm now saving for the 2.8!
 
If I used Canon I would go for the f2.8 IS if I could afford it (even if I had to save for a bit longer to get it)


1) IS - you might not need it everyday but at least once a year you will and it will make the difference between getting a shot and not getting a shot - what is that shot worth to you.

2) f2.8 is not just for low light, it is also very good at throwing the background out of focus, somthing that IS can't help with!!

3) Options - it allows you to use an x2 teleconvertor to get a 140-400 f5.6 which may occasionally be useful, it may also prompt you to go for the 100-400 f4 which probably won't please your bank manager ;)

4) resale value will be higher on an f2.8 IS in good condition as this is what everyone really wants but can't quite justify. If you really don't get on with it you'll easily sell the lens and for much closer to it's original purchase cost.

5) Remember Lenses are investments - a good one will last you many years (10+) - it it helps divide the purchase cost in your head by 10 to work out the value per year, suddenly you have to pick between £45(F4), £73 (f4 IS), £93 (f2.8) and £125 (f2.8 IS); to me the justification for the f2.8 IS becomes easier somehow.
 
Again thanks everyone the quality of information is outstanding, many things i would never have thought of, Simon your points on investment well made.(y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top