Originally Posted by
Keith B
I wason the fence about the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 4.0 IS but decided to go with the 2.8 since I do a lot of inside low light stuff. It was tough though, due to the fact the 4.0 has better IQ.
<div style="CLEAR:both;"]</div>
Is the IQ advantage of the f/4that significant? Comparing IS to IS or non-IS to non-IS, they aren't really THAT different in price, and I've been on the fence about it myself. I had just about decided that the IQ seemed to be nearly interchangeable at comparable apertures, with the 2.8 having the obvious advantage of larger apertures. IF the 70-200 f/4 really has distinguishably better IQ, I think I could just learn to live without the extra light gathering ability, and of course it is a little cheaper. I didn't get that impression distinctly when reading Brian's reviews, but maybe he was implying it and I was too dense to pick up on it.[img]/emoticons/emotion-10.gif[/img]