Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

If you're a user of a Canon DSLR, then welcome. This is your home.

Moderators: gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby muzz on Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:54 pm

I'm about to make my first serious lens purchase and had decided to stretch myself from the Canon 70-200mm f4L to go that bit further to the IS model above. Since then, I've been given the opportunity to get the 2.8L non-IS version for $130 cheaper than the f4L IS (normally about $200 more). This lens is going to have to last me a loooong time and my feeling is that the 2.8 is the better lens, but if the IS gives the equivalent of 3 stops more speed (according to the Canon blurb), would this be the better buy?

I'd really appreciate any thoughts you have, as I have to decide by tomorrow!!! (the opportunity to buy the 2.8 will be gone). Both lenses are through an Australian Canon dealer.

Apologies if this topic has been covered - I've tried multiple searches but the search terms are too common and give too many results to plough through.

Cheers, Muzz.
Last edited by muzz on Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Canon 7D | Canon 350D | G5 | S95 | 24-70mm f2.8L | 50mm f1.8 II | 70-200mm f2.8L USM | 430EX II | Strobist gear
User avatar
muzz
Member
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:42 am
Location: Mandurah, WA

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8 (nonIS)

Postby aim54x on Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:02 pm

The f/2.8 is bigger and heavier but has a faster aperture, if you do sports this will be very valuable, f/2.8 also allows you to push backgrounds further out of focus (for portraiture) and will be sharper at f/4 than the f/4L IS. On the other hand the IS will allow you to hand hold better in low light and is also a lighter lens.

For the price difference I would go the 70-200mm f/2.8L.
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42
Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black
Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
User avatar
aim54x
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7305
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Penshurst, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8 (nonIS)

Postby muzz on Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:08 pm

Thanks Cameron,

most of my photos are of my kids, mainly candid shots but I want to extend my photography so I'm not entirely sure where it will go. My conventional thinking would have lead me immediately to the larger aperture but I've never owned an IS lens and don't know if the trade off in aperture and therefore DOF for the 2.8 vs the weight and IS function on the 4. I know there are horses for courses but I have a feeling I wouldn't regret the 2.8 but may wish I'd gone faster if I bought the 4.

I've got tonight to make up my mind - maybe the answer will come in a dream!!

Thanks for your thoughts - opinions on this forum can be gold.

Cheers, Muzz.
Canon 7D | Canon 350D | G5 | S95 | 24-70mm f2.8L | 50mm f1.8 II | 70-200mm f2.8L USM | 430EX II | Strobist gear
User avatar
muzz
Member
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:42 am
Location: Mandurah, WA

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8 (nonIS)

Postby aim54x on Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:15 pm

I would check this thread later tonight or tomorrow morning just to see if anyone who has used both these lenses can share their experiences, I have played with the F4L IS and the F2.8L IS but not the F2.8L.
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42
Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black
Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
User avatar
aim54x
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7305
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Penshurst, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8 (nonIS)

Postby robert on Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:57 pm

No experience with either but i tend to use lenses at least one stop from open to improve resolution. Youre really looking at only one stop difference.

I guess the 2.8 is good if youre on a slightly older camera and dont change your ISO much. If you are happy with higher ISO (thus neglecting the one stop speed advantage) then the IS may allow you two stops lower shutter speed.

If it was me I'd get the 2.8 and put the couple of hundred$$ towards a flash. For indoors and outdoors a flash would be a better option than using either lens wide open. If youre chasing kids a flash will help keep the shutter speed up as will the extra stop of the 2.8. also get a little better out of focus background with a faster aperture.

decisions, decisions
Robert
EOS 5D Mk II, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200f4 IS, 50 f1.8, 100 macro, 300D (IR Mod)
User avatar
robert
Member
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:16 pm
Location: Sutherland, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby dviv on Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:25 am

It depends on what you will be using it for.

I have the F4IS and have taken sharp pictures at F4 and 1/15th handheld. The IS on the F4 is amazing (it's a newer version than on the 2.8IS - it's advertised as 4 stops)

If you are expecting lots of subject movement in low light then the 2.8 is probably a better tool for the job. In any other situation, the F4.

The F4 is an unbelievably good lens. Even wide open. :up:
7D, 60D, 70-200mm f/4LIS, 17-50mm f/2.8, 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 50mm f/1.4, 100mm f/2.8 Macro, 580EX II
User avatar
dviv
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 am
Location: North Shore, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby Luigi on Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:20 am

Hello.
I have been in the dilemma that you are in now, after 4 months of research and discussion I bought the F2.8 L IS. Having used the lens in very low light settings [5:00 AM] the results have been EXCELLENT. What helped me make my decision was that I would have the Lens for a long time and when I upgrade from by Canon 30D [Yes they do wear out with use] it will be compatible with my next Canon. Hope this helps.

Luigi.
Luigi
Newbie
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:41 pm

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby MATT on Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:52 pm

can ask what the price range is?

Have you considered the sigma 70-200 f2.8? Just another option. I grabbed a Nikon version for $890. Considerably cheaper than the Nikon 70-200 AF-S VR and still cheaper than the 80-200 without AF-S.

From reading all the canon 70-200 have a good reputation, but I think I'd go the f2.8 over IS.

Good luck

MATT
User avatar
MATT
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:24 pm
Location: Biloela, QLD-----nikon--D700-----

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby muzz on Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:40 pm

Thanks everyone. I went for the 2.8L in the end. There are a lot of valid points when arguing for one over the other and things were pretty even. In the end I decided that conventional wisdom always suggests it's better to have a faster lens and the main "shortcoming" with the 2.8 is the weight - maybe the missus won't want to use it now!

A friend is picking it up for me so should have it tonight, then I'll take it on holidays. Only downside is they don't have a 77mm UV filter they can send me so have to be careful not to scratch it!

Now, I just have to go and find a duck!!! :lol:

Thanks again, Muzz
Canon 7D | Canon 350D | G5 | S95 | 24-70mm f2.8L | 50mm f1.8 II | 70-200mm f2.8L USM | 430EX II | Strobist gear
User avatar
muzz
Member
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:42 am
Location: Mandurah, WA

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby aim54x on Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:26 pm

muzz wrote:Thanks everyone. I went for the 2.8L in the end. There are a lot of valid points when arguing for one over the other and things were pretty even. In the end I decided that conventional wisdom always suggests it's better to have a faster lens and the main "shortcoming" with the 2.8 is the weight - maybe the missus won't want to use it now!


Congratuations, is it really that much of a drawback, esp since your partner wont want to use it?

muzz wrote:A friend is picking it up for me so should have it tonight, then I'll take it on holidays. Only downside is they don't have a 77mm UV filter they can send me so have to be careful not to scratch it!


Use the lens hood. Good luck and remember to post that duck picture at:
http://dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=34593&p=377901&hilit=duck+pix#p377901
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42
Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black
Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
User avatar
aim54x
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7305
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Penshurst, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby Wink on Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:18 pm

Is the IS feature relevant when shooting panning sports shots like race cars?

I could see the f2.8 being handy for low light and portraits over the f4. Just the IS version is heaps more $.
Adam.
MY PHOTOS
Allows Image Editing
User avatar
Wink
Senior Member
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Seymour, VIC

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby zafra52 on Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:07 pm

It will be interesting to find out your vews on your new adquisition.
User avatar
zafra52
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4786
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:22 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby dviv on Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:46 am

Wink wrote:Is the IS feature relevant when shooting panning sports shots like race cars?


Yes - the F4/IS has two IS modes - one (mode 1) is for regular, handheld use, the other (mode 2) is for panning, where the IS only works in one plane (the up/down) so you can pan horizontally and still get the benefits of IS at lower shutter speeds. :up:
7D, 60D, 70-200mm f/4LIS, 17-50mm f/2.8, 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 50mm f/1.4, 100mm f/2.8 Macro, 580EX II
User avatar
dviv
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 am
Location: North Shore, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby johnmc on Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:21 pm

Interesting reading this thread... I've been contemplating the 70-200 f/4L myself... but I keep thinking I should wait until I can save some extra $$$ and shell out for the 2.8. If nothing else it'll benefit in my regular low light condition nightmares (albeit the lenses I own other than the nifty fifty pale in comparison even with the f/4)

Might see if I can hire an f/4 for a weekend to have a play - any suggestions on hire places in Victoria?
Canon EOS50D, 17-40mm f4 L USM, 24-105mm f4 L IS USM, 50mm f1.4 USM, 28-80mm f3.5-5.6, 70-300mm f4-5.6 & various other bits ;)
my flickr photostream
User avatar
johnmc
Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:45 pm
Location: Narre Warren South

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby aim54x on Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:02 am

dviv wrote:
Wink wrote:Is the IS feature relevant when shooting panning sports shots like race cars?


Yes - the F4/IS has two IS modes - one (mode 1) is for regular, handheld use, the other (mode 2) is for panning, where the IS only works in one plane (the up/down) so you can pan horizontally and still get the benefits of IS at lower shutter speeds. :up:


does IS/VR really extend that handhold capability when panning? I was panning with Marcus (photomarcs - who is loving his 70-200 f/4 - non IS) with my 70-200VR and did not find any difference in the keeper rate with VR on or off. The motion of panning already helps with reducing vertical movment i found....I ended up keeping VR on just in case though

Maybe some of the motorsport pros here can give you something more definitive
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42
Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black
Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
User avatar
aim54x
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7305
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Penshurst, Sydney

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby zafra52 on Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:07 pm

Johnmc, a couple of years back when I was trying to make up my mind on what lens to buy someone told me here to wait till I had the money for the lens I really wanted; otherwise I would end up with a lens I did not want and no money. Of couse, I found this truth the hardway for I had ended up with far too many lenses. Some of which cannot be used with my next camera when I eventually get it. I guess what I am telling you is to think ahead; not just in your present needs. But, I still want to hear the final chapter of your story.
User avatar
zafra52
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4786
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:22 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby johnmc on Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:00 am

Thanks for the advice zafra - a very valid point - I'll be sure to keep you posted ;)
Canon EOS50D, 17-40mm f4 L USM, 24-105mm f4 L IS USM, 50mm f1.4 USM, 28-80mm f3.5-5.6, 70-300mm f4-5.6 & various other bits ;)
my flickr photostream
User avatar
johnmc
Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:45 pm
Location: Narre Warren South

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby photomarcs on Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:30 am

I settled for the Non IS f4L... works a charm!

IS, in my belief is not an essential for everyone, its a nifty feature, but its not for everyone.

Alot of people would argue that, and i'm open for it.

My belief of the effectiveness of IS is a couple of stops if i'm not wrong, but thats great and all, it's a safety feature really. If you can't get a shot handheld at low shutter speeds then IS is your best friend. However, using a lens of this calibre for panning is just the same as the Non IS.

It's all personal choice really. I'd prefer saving my money on IS and save up for a nice ultra wide =D
Canon | Sony | Panasonic | Tamron | Sigma
My photography is still developing.
Don't be so negative!
http://www.photomarcs.com
User avatar
photomarcs
Member
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:47 pm
Location: Liverpool, Sydney Australia

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby Wink on Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:52 pm

This whole thing still has me confused...
They say the 2.8 is faster so it's good for low light. But what about if 2.8 just doesn't give you the DOF you need?
Wouldn't the IS be the most important factor between the 2 rather than one aperture stop?

Maybe my understanding is wrong... :?
Adam.
MY PHOTOS
Allows Image Editing
User avatar
Wink
Senior Member
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Seymour, VIC

Re: Comparison Canon 70-200mm f4L IS vs f2.8L (nonIS)

Postby aim54x on Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:58 pm

Wink wrote:This whole thing still has me confused...
They say the 2.8 is faster so it's good for low light. But what about if 2.8 just doesn't give you the DOF you need?
Wouldn't the IS be the most important factor between the 2 rather than one aperture stop?

Maybe my understanding is wrong... :?


It depends on how you look at it. But the DOF difference between 2.8 and 4 is minimal. If you stop down then IS will come into play, but if you have to freeze motion in low light, stopping down and using IS will not help you as will not have the shutterspeed to freeze the motion, IS cannot help you here. In the case of panning IS does not really help as the lateral motion already helps to negate any vertical motion.

Hope this helps
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42
Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black
Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
User avatar
aim54x
Senior Member
 
Posts: 7305
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:13 pm
Location: Penshurst, Sydney


Return to Canon Corral

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests