Canon EF 70-200 camparisons

[Blake]

Hi All,

Im looking to drop some coin on a new lens this week. Ive been reading Bryan's reviews for months on Canon's 70-200mm family, and I was wondering if someone could give me some recommendations based on their own experiences.

As an amateur / hobbyist the f/2.8 L IS II USM is out of my budget - I'm torn deciding between the f/4.0 L IS USM and the f/2.8 L USM.

I like the idea of the f/2.8 stop, but am also keen on the IS the f/4 offers.

Im hoping to take advantage of the 2.8 with action photography, (potentially with a 1.4 extender) for motorsports, but I know realistically it will be used far more frequently on landscape and portrait photos.

Any feed back from those who have had experience with the above would be greatly appreciated.

[Joel Eade]

It seems your thoughts are right on track.....if you want or need action/low light shots and want to use converters go for the Version I f/2.8. Otherwise the f/4 is a great performer. It's lighter and easier to handle and it is a very sharp lens.

I have Version II of the f/2.8 IS USM and previously had Version I.....they are both stellar, Version II is slightly sharper especially with converters.

[Jayson]

I have the f/4 IS version and use extenders with it all the time. I use mine inside a bunch and just have to bump the ISO up another notch, but if your not shooting fast subjects indoors with it, the IS is awesome in that lens. I use mine outside for landscapes, birds when needed, and kids sports. The AF is as fast if not faster than the f/2.8 version. I think the f/4 IS version is sharper than the f/2.8 L non-IS.

[DavidEccleston]

I think that if you're looking at the f/4 lens, you should consider the 70-300L as well. It's as sharp, has IS, and goes further. The downside is the variable aperture, but it's not much of a downside, in my view, in the particular case. It goes to f/5.6 well after 200mm, so you can ignore the "But it's a full stop slower!" argument. It's at f/5.0 for the last 25mm or so before 200mm, which is the biggest drawback. For the majority of the zoom range, it's the same f/4 or just 1/3 of a stop slower. In the end, it's up to you whether f/4 at 200mm or going to 300mm is more important.

[peety3]

What shutter speeds are you getting in similar focal lengths? If 1/EFL or faster, go with the 2.8. If 16/EFL to 1/EFL, go with the 4IS. If slower than 16/EFL, get a tripod.
I/we own a 2.8 IS (v1, not vII) and a 4IS. My wife usually has the 4IS as she prefers the lighter lens. If she isn't shooting and I think I'll have enough light, I grab the 4IS. I'm keeping an eye out for a used 4 non-IS to have at my disposal.