My First L???

[Jayson]

Wow! Great shots everyone. I really appreciate the input. This is going to be one heck of a choice. Both lenses have very high positives with little negatives.

[Keith B]

Cool shot.


That is a pretty tight DOF for 5.6.

[Jon Ruyle]

Just one more opinion...


I have the f/2.8 IS. For tennis or kids in the yard, I would rather give up the IS than the stop. I like the background blur of the f/2.8, and f/2.8 is better for stopping action. Plus if you are shooting during the day, there is usually plenty of light outside without IS.


On the other hand, if you want to take shots at twilight, you might consider IS. Some say IS is useless for kids because they move around so much, and they do. But they also stay still a lot, and I've gotten good pictures of kids with IS and very low shutter speeds. And if you are shooting tight portraits (head & shoulders) of children, you might want to stop down to at least f/4 anyway (DOF is reduced for cluseups, and if you are taking a picture of a childs head at f/2.8, your dof is tiny... you probably won't get both eyes in focus).


Bottom line: f/2.8 IS gives most versatility. If pressed to choose between IS and f/2.8, I would pick IS for shooting tight portraits in low light, but go with f/2.8 for tennis or general backyard kid pictures.


Not an easy decision. FWIW, I had the f/4 non-IS and loved it, too.


Some have suggested the 24-105 f/4 IS. I have this lens also. I agree that it is a better "all around" choice (if I'm going somewhere where I don't know what to expect, I take this lens). The IS plus wide angle means low shutter speeds, so it is a fantastic very low light lens (for still subjects). And I would definitely prefer 24-105 for scenery photos (where probably want to go wider than 70mm and usually stop down anyway). But for kids in the yard or tennis, I recommend the longer lens.


Hope this helps-


Jon.

[KurtK]

<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]Have you considered the - Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens? I know it is not quite the focal range you seem to be looking for, but it is a great first L lens.<o></o>

[Snap]

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?

[Jon Ruyle]

My take, and perhaps others who know more will correct me:


I think you are indeed reading too much into lens age.


Optical designs don't age nearly as fast as electronics. These are all modern lenses. Canon updates camera bodies regularly, but I wouldn't hold my breath for an update on a lens.


IMO, weight and cost are much more important factors in this decision than age and image quality.


As for a good general purpose low-light lens, for still subjects I suggest you consider the 24-105 f/4 IS. The IS makes it hand-holdable in lower light than the 24-70, and the longer focal length makes it (IMO) just as good a portrait lens (very subjective, I admit). Of course, if you plan to take pictures of rapidly moving things, the extra stop trumps IS.


Best of luck-


Jon.