I'm a rookie to photography and just starting to build my kit. The lens recommendations on this site for different purposes, combined with the reviews, have been a gold mine of information. I currently have one lens, the 24-105mm f/4 IS, and I love it.


I'm now looking for a longer zoom and will probably pick up the 70-200mm. However, I'm facing the same difficulty choosing between the f/4 and f/2.8. On the one hand, lighter, less expensive package, better optics on the f/4; superior action stopping and low light performance on the f/2.8 but heavier and more expensive.


The thing that's tilting my decision more and more towards the f/4 IS is that both the IS and non-IS versions of the f/2.8 are much older lenses (f/2.8 IS 7-and-a-half years; f/2.8 14-years; f/4 IS 2-and-a-quarter years; f/4 10-and-a-half years). This is pure speculation on my part, but I'm concerned that Canon might be updating the f/2.8 IS in the near term with a version II. Possible improvements could include third generation 4-stop IS and re-working of the optics to be on par with the f4. The last thing I want happening is to buy the f/2.8 IS, then have Canon come up with a better version in 12-months.


The 24-70 f/2.8 is very well regarded as well and I need a low-light general purpose lens. But I'm holding off buying the 24-70 for the same reason -- age (6-and-a-quarter years). The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS was introduced just under 3-years ago, and it would seem logical that this "L" would have IS added pretty soon in a version II.


Am I reading too much into the age of the lenses, or should I just go and get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS or 24-70 f/2.8?