Printable View
Now that I pretty much made up my mind on the lens another question popped up. Sorry if this sounds repetitive but I need opinions please.
Im looking to buy the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 NON IS, but I could also get the Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS.
Will I get more out of the lens with IS than I would with the non IS lens but with the f/2.8?
I just responded to that question in your lasty post.....[:D]
I never even considered the F4 IS in my original decision... it was always between the 2.8 IS or non-IS.
Iended up buyingthe 2.8 non-ISsince it allowed me to buy an Induro monopod and stay within my budget. It definately gives you a better chance in low-light settingssuch as churches, gymnasiums, and outdoor around dusk than an f4 lenswould but having a steady hand comes into play at that point without the monopod.
Pictures from this lens are breathtaking... especially if your abokaholic and can manage to shoot at f2.8 @200mm whenever possible to maximize the effect.
In hindsight of over a year of use where I canrecollect having blurred pics even with my monopod,IF I were to do it over again, I would've justbitten the bullet (aka blown my budget) andbought the 2.8 IS version to begin with.
That all said, the 2.8 non-IS is my recommendationgiven your choices.
Dave
I agree, hands down the 2.8. I have an f/4 non-IS and the 2.8 IS, and even WITH IS I can't imagine the 4 being nearly as useful as the 2.8. If you can't get the shutter speed you need to freeze the action of the players w/ an F/4 lens, it ain't gonna matter if it has IS or not, unless you're just intending to have everything BUT the players sharp ;)
The f/2.8 will be much better for sports than the f/4 IS
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShutterbugJohan
I'm curious...why would this be true? Most sports are outdoors, in good light. An f/4 should do fine.
I've seen plenty of fantastic shots with another f/4 lens (the 300 mm).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
It really depends what sport you'll want to be photographing. For example, if I were photographing sports, it would likely be indoor basketball games or outdoor football games at night. Under these conditions, the f/2.8 (IS or non-IS), a monopod, and a camera with decent high-ISO performance would be ideal. I'm not sure an f/4 lens would excel under these conditions.
I will be shooting football, cheerleading, hockey, and swimming. The camera I have is the Canon XSi.
Here's a link to a softball tournament shot with a 30D,f2.8 70-200 and ISO 3200. My partner used a Mark I at high ISO (a bit noisy) and an f2.8 300...
My guess would be that an f4 would not have givenme the shutter speeds required for stop-action pics... Needless to say I discounted all the pricing as they were 'just okay' for sale.
Dave
http://galleries.10framesasecond.com/g/2009_az_5a-i_state_championship
Here's a decent pic of the pitcher with a certain amount of blur due to the slower shutter speeds. you can also see my partner NOT taking pics with that 300mm f2.8 L glass just behind her in the background... good help is hard to find... just kidding Barry [:P]
http://galleries.10framesasecond.com/p/red_mountain_gallery/dsw_img_4045_09051542
LOL.
I agree with going f/2.8. I had the f/4 for a while, loved that it was light and very sharp but I ended up needed the faster glass. I ended up splurging and getting the f/2.8 with IS. I haven't been able to compare IS to non IS with the same f/ stop but I definitely thing going with the fastest glass possible is helpful, especially in sports.
I noticed a big difference when taking pictures of my dog outside chasing the frisbee. IS won't let you "stop" the action like a high shutter speed will. I do find the IS to be super helpful when I'm taking portraits indoors though.
To me the only drawbacks to IS are the price and the extra power consumed. I'm not sure if it adds any weight or not, but I definitely feel the weight difference between f/2.8 and f/4. Well worth it IMO.
Oh I forgot to add, if you're shooting hockey, I'd go with the 2.8.
<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]For me it's simple. If you are a pro go for the f2.8. If you are an amateur wanting to use it as walk around lens, take it on trips/vacation etc with you go for the f4. <span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"]It’s too heavy the f2.8. You'll start having problems with your neck after a couple of hours!<o:p></o:p>
The 2.8 is definately heavier (and the IS does add some weight). You get used to it though (and your neck gets a lot bigger :P)
Another pro for the 2.8 - if you decide you want a little more reach later on, you can always grab the 1.4x extender and then you're looking at an F/4 lens with a bit more reach if F/4 will do in certain situations. If you get the f/4 now, you'll have a 5.6 lens which is really beyond the land of usefullness for a lot of sports.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnman
Given that you'll be shooting sports, I'd go with the 2.8. I have the 2.8IS and am pleased that I waited to get it. I was torn between the 4IS and the 2.8IS, and waited until I saved a little more. I rented both for a couple of days, and they are both fantastic IQ lenses, both with strength and weaknesses. However, the hockey and swimming shots were better w/ the 2.8 for obvious reasons.
There is quite a lobby out there that think the f4 version is a lot sharper - This includes my local canon dealer who has tried more than a few samples to try and disprove it. I have the f4 IS version and with the matching 1.4x extender it beats my 100-400 L series every time. With a 2.0x extender you do lose auto focus.
I would get the 2.8, especially if you are going to be doing any indoor work at all.
Well, I made up my mind, FINALLY....lol
I am going with the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non is - just cant afford the IS version.
Anyway my price will be a total of $1,195.28 which includes tax and shipping. Does this sound like a fair / good price? This is for a brand new lens. Thoughts on the price?
Worth every penny. ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnman
Excellent price donnman.
You'll really enjoy that lens. I know I do.
Well played, sir ;)
I just got the 70-200 2.8L IS USM. It's awesome! Yes it is heavy. Yes the IS gulps up battery power. But man, it don't get no better!! The pictures are sharp, the lens is a tank, weather/dust sealing, the list goes on. Bite the bullet! You won't wonder what you're missing if you have it all!