Canon EF70-200mm F/4L non IS or IS

Hi, I was browsing the net looking for reviews etc on the canon lens and came across this site. Sorry if this topic has been discussed already, but as I said I am new to here! I have a canon rebel XSI for the body, and just bought the kit lens and one other to start with, but having my camera only 6 months I am already wanting more out of a lens! I do outdoor sports / pets / portraits. I like what I read on the 70-200mm F/4L but unsure if I would need to upgrade in cost to the IS or if I could go with the non IS. Any suggestions would be appreciated, as I said I am mostly outdoors in good lighting, would like to focus on portraits and outdoor sports (horseback riding to be specific)

Welcome to the forum.


This thread may help you decide. If you go with the non IS, make sure you have a mono-pod or tripod.


Mark

Hey there and welcome!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

but having my camera only 6 months I am already wanting more out of a lens!

---

Haha don't buy an L-lens! This will speed up the process of wanting more of them enormously!! [:P]


I've done quite some sports-photography myself with a 70-200 f4L lens. Outdoors it's perfect, indoors it's not useable without a flash. For sports you don't need an IS system.


However for portraits it might be a different story. If you're confident about having enough light to at least have a shutterspeed of 1/200-1/320 so you can handhold the lens at 200mm. Go for the non-IS version! But of course if you don't have enough light, so you'd have to push ISO (not great for portraiture, not a big problem for sports) go for the IS version.


Personally if I needed this lens again I would go for the IS version. At this moment sports isn't my mainobjective anymore and IS could be a very welcome feature.


Also the price difference between both lenses is smaller now as well. It used to be 500 vs 1000 euros, now it's 570 vs 1000 euros which would make my choice harder than it used to be.


Let me make 1 thing clear...the 70-200 f4L is amazing for sports, but perhaps not that great for portraiture. The 70-200 F4L IS doesn't do a better job with sports-photography. However at the price of the 70-200 F4L IS you could also buy a 70-200F4L for sports WITH for instance an 85mm f1.8 for portraiture. That would make your photos even better!


Hope my advice helped a little,


Jan

Thanks Jan that is great advice!! And Mark, I do have a tripod however I prefer not to use it, but that may just be a matter of getting used to it.


Jan, you open you a whole new door of possibilities, I read a review that stated this lens was great for portraits! I first bough the camera to do sports / animals (horses, dogs, cats, domestic pets Not wildlife) but I am realizing how much I enjoy taking pictures of People! Defenitly going to keep on researching!

Wanted to point out, as I didnt mention in the original post that the other lens I have is theCanon EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens (was cheap at the time I bought my camera and just wanted something to play with)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

I do have a tripod however I prefer not to use it, but that may just be a matter of getting used to it.

---

I found it very easy to handle the 70-200 f4L at sports without a tripod or monopod. I know some people think differently, but in my eyes it limits your flexibility. And the 70-200 isn't that big so your probably not getting very tired from handholding it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

I read a review that stated this lens was great for portraits!

---

Don't get me wrong...it is! It's just not an easy lens to use for portraiture. The f4 aperture limits your back/fore-ground differentiation (blur) and although it is possible to get some nice blur. It's not easy. Also the 200mm focal length without IS needs you to have a shutterspeed higher than necessary for portraiture for shooting handheld. This means you'd have bump up your iso at some time, which isn't helping you with portraiture. So to eliminate the shutterspeed "problem" with the lens you could buy the IS version. However it does remain an f4 lens(read: hard to get that desired out of focus blur). Since your camera body isn't weathersealed, the extra weathersealing advantage of the 70-200 f4L IS version isn't used either.


For the extra money for the IS system you could also buy a better lens for portraiture. Think about an 85mm 1.8 which makes a great portrait lens, much better than the 70-200!


So for the money you could get the best of both worlds: 70-200 f4L non IS for sports(and also portraiture with nice weather) and an additional lens for portraiture (which could also be used in low-light and indoor conditions!).


Think about it,


Jan


Edit:



<div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

Wanted to point out, as I didnt mention in the original post that the other lens I have is theCanon EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens (was cheap at the time I bought my camera and just wanted something to play with)

---

<div>That lens should give you an idea of how you can get strong out of focus blur, which is highly desired with most portraits. However, the 50mm 1.8 is not a lens you should have if you're more serious about portraiture. Bokeh isn't pleasing and auto-focus is slow.</div>
<div>What type of portraiture do you prefer to shoot? full body shots? tight shoulder/head portraits?</div>
<div>Oh and what kit-lens do you have?</div>
</div>

Jan, I understand what you are saying about not being easy to get the background blur is exactly what I am currently having trouble with! Once again I appreciate the advice and your time to reply! This morning I was just about ready to go ahead and order this lens without the IS online, but you are making me take a moment to think about this!

I putt these in an earlier thread before, both shot with 50D and 70-200 F4L:


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200blur.jpg


This is f4 at 100mm. I should notice that there's at least 15m/50 feet of free space behind the subject and the subject is probably close to minimum focus distance


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200blur2.jpg


This is at 70mm f4. You'll see that I needed to use 70mm otherwise I had to stand back a lot further. At 200mm this photo would have looked a bit better. Here you see what happens when there isn't a lot of room behind your subject.

The camera came with the EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens

[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.45.74/34515_5F00_406135856758_5F00_509726758_5F00_490356 1_5F00_5578987_5F00_n.jpg[/img][img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.45.74/34266_5F00_406602386758_5F00_509726758_5F00_491517 4_5F00_2351213_5F00_n.jpg[/img]





Two of my most recent takes. The top is some from some grad photos I did for a friend,with the kit lens, and this bottom one is a rather shadowy shot of my dog with the 50mm f/1.8 II lens

Alright, let's do another approach. Put your 18-200 to 70-200 range and start photographing without the IS turned on. Shoot at f5.6 and compensate for that 1 stop of light you would get with the 70-200 F4L. This will tell you if you're comfortable shooting without IS.


For sports I'm in no doubt that you will enjoy the non-Is version, but I can't tell you if you'd miss the IS for other purposes.


My safest bet would be to buy the 70-200 F4L, save some money(perhaps earn some with your shots) and save it for a better general purpose lens like the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS USM or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 or others.


You're gonna want a better general lens eventually, I can promise you that, because after seeing footage of an L-lens your 18-200 will look..."not that great" anymore [:P]

Good suggestion.


Looking at your reccomendation of getting a general purpose lens I do like that idea. My original plan was to have the camera for a year, save up, and drop some money on a nice lens inDecember/Janurary (kind of doa birthday/christmas gift for myself similar as I did with my first purchase!) Maybe I could get one of your suggestions, or even still the ER70-200mm F/4L (IS or NON) but for now since I am getting the most enjoyment out of taking photos of people, I think I am going to change direction for the time, spend a bit less, and look into a better portrait lens such as the 85mm 1.8

I really like your efforts it is highly appertained

With the 85mm 1.8 I understand it will take great face/head closeup shots, but the people who I have asking for photos are primarily families, so I would need something able to capture a group of people (like a family of 4, or mother daughter that kind of thing) any suggestios for that, or could I use the 85mm 1.8 from further back and still get a better image than with what I currently have&gt;? Where I get my fun is from the close ups, but if I want to take pictures for people I am going to have to be more flexible.

Hey again!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

My original plan was to have the camera for a year, save up, and drop some money on a nice lens inDecember/Janurary (kind of doa birthday/christmas gift for myself similar as I did with my first purchase!)

---

If you asked me how I would be looking in 2 years(photographing development) at the time I was buying my first DSLR, I could have never guessed it would turned out the way it did [:P]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

Maybe I could get one of your suggestions, or even still the ER70-200mm F/4L (IS or NON) but for now since I am getting the most enjoyment out of taking photos of people, I think I am going to change direction for the time, spend a bit less, and look into a better portrait lens such as the 85mm 1.8

---

It's not such an easy choice as you had imagined right? [:P] I too think it's a hard decision, since I'm aware of my own style, but I have no real clue what you like. I personally think a solid basis (read: body with a decent general purpose lens) is something I need. My photography subjects are very various and that explains the solid base.



<div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

With the 85mm 1.8 I understand it will take great face/head closeup shots, but the people who I have asking for photos are primarily families, so I would need something able to capture a group of people (like a family of 4, or mother daughter that kind of thing) any suggestios for that, or could I use the 85mm 1.8 from further back and still get a better image than with what I currently have&gt;? Where I get my fun is from the close ups, but if I want to take pictures for people I am going to have to be more flexible.

---

There are 2 things I'd like to say here. I must say that the Canon 70-200 F4L is very usable at f4!


For groups of 4 people and close-ups the 70-200 will be great I think. With larger groups you can't shoot at real wide apertures because your focus plane will set one person perfectly sharp and the other 3 out of focus. f4 could be used very well in these kind of shots. It doesn't really matter what lens you use. Of course for larger groups you will likely use the 70mm side of the lens. Of course you'll need to watch out a little bit more for a good background. Make sure you've got some empty space behind your subjects.


200mm will be perfect for close-ups and single person head-shoulder portraits. Plus it can also be used for sports very well.


Second thing to mention is that 200mm gives you a stealthy look. You can take close-ups of people without them even noticing.


Only downside to the 70-200 is that it's white/grey. It gets a lot of attention. Not necessarily bad, but some people could get a bit shy. But if your photographing friends etc this likely won't be a problem.


A plus: with sportsphotography it isn't hard to earn a little pocketmoney.(I've never done it, since I have different thoughts about asking money, but I'm just saying [;)]) Especially sports with horses are the places to be when you want to make some money...just a tip [:P]





About the 85mm 1.8: it makes a perfect portraiture lens. However it lacks the ability to zoom. You can't go from a group shot to a close-up in an instance. For group shots f1.8 is way too wide. You probably won't have everyone in focus. So you end up pushing up your aperture to at least f2.8-f4. For head-shoulder portraits it's great though. It is a great lens, but I doubt it's the best solution for you.


I'm not making it much easier am I?


Well I'll post a few snapshots of portraits with the 70-200 and you'll figure out if you like the idea or not [:D] Don't mind the composition please, these are old [A]


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200-1.jpg


200mm f4 1/1000 ISO500 - These guys stand like 1m/3ft away from each other


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200-2.jpg


150mm f4 1/2500 ISO400 - There's a lot of free space behind them and you'll see it's blurred very nicely.


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200-3.jpg


200mm f5 1/500 ISO100 - Enough free background space lets you make quite a good head-shoulder shot.


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200-5.jpg


200mm f4 1/640 ISO400 - In this case there's no more than 3m/10ft until the first tree/branch. It's made in a quite dense forest.


http://www.fruityview.nl/tdp/70200-6.jpg
</div>


73mm f7.1 1/500 ISO200 - With group shots you don't necessary need to blur away the background, unless it's to disturbing.


Hope these shots give you an idea of the portraiture potential of this lens. I've never had or used the 85mm 1.8 so I can't show you anything from it...


I must honestly say that I also had the 50mm 1.8 once, but I felt the focal length wasn't right for me and the lack of build and sharpness weren't really good either. Oh to find out if the 85mm is good for you. Set your lens to about 85mm and try it yourself!



<div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by my palliser

I really like your efforts it is highly appertained

---

<div>I honestly have no idea what appertained means...I'm sorry my English ain't that good [8-|]</div>
<div>Hope I helped you out a bit, I'm going to sleep now [:D]</div>
<div>-Jan</div>
</div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheiky

<div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by my palliser

I really like your efforts it is highly appertained
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

</div>



<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

I am from Texas and I did not know what the meaning of this word was either. It is not a word we in the US use often.


Mark

Go for IS...if you can afford it, and you shoot without a tripod most of the time. The IS on this lens works incredibly well. At 200mm on a crop body, even with great light you're better off with the IS.


You should also know that the f/4 pretty much limits this lens to outdoor, daytime uses. But the 2.8 is so much heavier and more expensive anyway....





I'll attach a pic of a flamingo at the zoo, handheld at 183mm.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.45.77/flamingo.jpg[/img]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clemmb

I am from Texas and I did not know what the meaning of this word was either. It is not a word we in the US use often.

---

I'm born British, living in Canada, and I assumed it was a typo of some sort. I'd never heard the word before today. I checked online, and it does appear to be in *some* of the online dictionaries.


As long as you keep in mind that nobody will have any idea what you're talking about, feel free to continue using it. [:D]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidEccleston

I'd never heard the word before today. I checked online, and it does appear to be in *some* of the online dictionaries.

---

I had to go look it up also but even the definitiions I found, I did not understand ...I hate when you need a dictionary to understand the definition of words in the dictionary!

I'd go for the IS version, hands down. Here's the effect of IS (taken with my 70-200 f4 IS lens, both at 200mm, 1/30 sec)


Without IS With IS


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/400x300/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_8152.JPG[/img][img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/400x300/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_8154.JPG[/img]


The effect of IS is I really don't have to worry about stabilizing my camera. That along with weather sealing gives you that "I don't have to worry about my lens, I can concentrate on what I'm shooting" feeling. [Y]


The IS version is also sharper and Weather-sealed (that was the reason I bought it instead of the non IS). Here are my two favorite photos from this lens:






http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/...bebbc394_b.jpg



http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/...0d54690b_b.jpg


I do have portrait shots with this lens but the subjects would not like me to post their pictures here. [N] And it IS (no pun intended) a fine portraiture lens, it just won't give you those stunning thin DoF portraits. They're not bad at all, though. It's not a specialist lens: It's good at macro, portraits, sports, and long landscapes, but it's not specialized for any of those tasks. That doesn't mean it doesn't do them well, efficiently, and relatively cheaply, though. In summary a great lens.


Good Luck!


brendan

My kit lens is acctualy EF-S 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS..... my bad


I tried as you suggested taking shots with the IS off.... didnt seem to make a difference for what i was doing, I tried to post one of the pics but my computer is being fussy at the moment... but its evening, outdoors, so good light, and of my dog again, so something that keeps moving, not something still. I ordered the 85mm 1.8, should be here by the end of the week or early next, but am still debating going with the 70-200 non IS as well... or the other option is to wait to save up for the IS, but those two lenses may be a good enough pair for what I want!!! Sigh! But I sure am excited totry my 85 1.8!!!! Yipee!

Good purchase - the 85 f/1.8 is a pretty great lens. If I were you I'd save up for the 70-200mm f/4L IS. The image quality is absolutely spectacular, I use mine all the time. I find IS is very valuable at the longer focal lengths.


Enjoy the new toy, Ben.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

I ordered the 85mm 1.8, should be here by the end of the week or early next

---

Oh that's nice! I'm sure you'll love it a lot![:D]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

but am still debating going with the 70-200 non IS as well... or the other option is to wait to save up for the IS, but those two lenses may be a good enough pair for what I want!!! Sigh!

---

the non-Is would do great for sports and outdoors activities! You don't need IS for that. To be honest, paying almost double for IS is something that must be justifiable for me. Since you got the 85mm 1.8 the IS version won't be needed for indoor/low-light shooting nor portraits.


I think you're better off buying the non-Is version for almost half the money and save up for a better replacement of your 18-55 in the long run.


Anyway enjoy your new lens!! [:D]

I feel the same way you do, that if I am going to be paying double the price it really needs to be justified! I may go with the non IS and do an upgrade later, I think it was you who suggested looking for a used one to get even cheaper which I will do! I ordered my 85 1.8 online from B&amp;H!!! The prices seemed much better than here in canada even with the exchange and shipping! Its supposed to get here Monday, so will have to see how it turns out! Thanks for the support ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

I ordered my 85 1.8 online from B&amp;H!!! The prices seemed much better than here in canada even with the exchange and shipping!

---

The EF 85mm f/1.8 is a great lens - IMO, one of the best, if not the best, values in the Canon lineup.


No sure what your time frame is on the 70-200mm zoom, but Canon USA is currently offering instant rebates on both the 70-200 f/4L non-IS ($45) and the f/4L IS version ($80). If you purchase from B&amp;H, you get the Canon USA rebate. Those rebates end on July 10th, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this_gurl

I think it was you who suggested looking for a used one to get even cheaper which I will do!

---

Well I said it for the Tamron 17-50, because I think the 70-200 f4L could be hard to find second hand for a bargain. Tamron 17-50 is a real good performing general purpose lens for a bargain and if you can find a second hand it's probably the best value for your money general purpose lens you can get!


Perhaps the rebates will offer you a brand new 70-200 with some cash-back, doesn't sound so bad either [A]


Good luck!

I did see the offer on the 70-200 and its appealing because it would basically take away the cost of shipping! But I wanted to recieve my 85 1.8 from them first to check it out..... and it isnt supposed to get here till Monday the 12!!!!