Canon EF 70-200 f4L IS/F2.8L/2.8L IS discuss.
- Thread starter hoolio
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,902
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- No
What I've gleaned from reading many reviews and user opinions:
The 70-200 f/4L IS is the lightest and extremely sharp (good "walk-about" tele-photo if you don't want as much weight).
The 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS is extremely sharp and stop faster than the f/4 IS for about the same price, but larger and heavier. Quite popular with sports shooters I believe, since for sports IS is superfluous but an extra stop can really help.
The 70-200 f/2.8L IS (mark 1) isn't quite as sharp as either, but it's f/2.8 with IS.
Also try a forum search, there are plenty of threads already discussing these lenses.
The 70-200 f/4L IS is the lightest and extremely sharp (good "walk-about" tele-photo if you don't want as much weight).
The 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS is extremely sharp and stop faster than the f/4 IS for about the same price, but larger and heavier. Quite popular with sports shooters I believe, since for sports IS is superfluous but an extra stop can really help.
The 70-200 f/2.8L IS (mark 1) isn't quite as sharp as either, but it's f/2.8 with IS.
Also try a forum search, there are plenty of threads already discussing these lenses.
Photodiva
Foot elevated on the stool
- Messages
- 4,134
- Name
- Carol
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Julian, I think this has probably been done before. The short answer is 'it depends' on what your use will be. What do you see yourself using it for? What is your budget? I have the f2.8L IS but I nearly always have the IS off because I am using fast shutter speeds most of the time. but I need the low light capability of f2.8. Its not just a case of comparing lenses and prices.
- Messages
- 3,726
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
I went for the F4IS as I didn't want to spend as much as the 2.8IS but wanted weather sealing which only the IS models are. Am very happy with it, don't miss the weight of the 2.8 when shooting for 24 hours at Le Mans and it takes the 1.4 exii well.
OP
- Messages
- 334
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks for the replies so far. Photodiva I did do a search and 12 pages appeared much of which I didn't think was relevant and also couldn't find anything where all three were discussed in one thread, also if I can get someone else to do the work 
btw I mostly enjoy landscape but I suppose it will be a bit of an allrounder and budget is not that important (but of course it is a factor), I would rather buy well the first time and use for years.
btw I mostly enjoy landscape but I suppose it will be a bit of an allrounder and budget is not that important (but of course it is a factor), I would rather buy well the first time and use for years.Is this true? I was under the impression all L lenses were.
- Messages
- 15,781
- Name
- Rich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Certainly is true, for instance no weather sealing on the 400mm f/5.6 and 100-400m or 70-200 f/4 (non IS)
- Messages
- 7,217
- Name
- Peter
- Edit My Images
- No
Hi hoolio;
Five months ago I bought (Gumtree) a mint/boxed/as new Canon 70-200mm L f/2.8 (non-IS), paid £750 for it.
Your always going to hear people say it's a heavy lens, but it's the quality/glass your buying and it's probably going to be used on a tripod quite a bit of the time etc, it's weight doesn't bother me whatsoever!
It's the quality of images I bought it for, really loving this quality lens in my camera bag, fantastic glass!!
Five months ago I bought (Gumtree) a mint/boxed/as new Canon 70-200mm L f/2.8 (non-IS), paid £750 for it.
Your always going to hear people say it's a heavy lens, but it's the quality/glass your buying and it's probably going to be used on a tripod quite a bit of the time etc, it's weight doesn't bother me whatsoever!
It's the quality of images I bought it for, really loving this quality lens in my camera bag, fantastic glass!!