Reading mode: Light Dark

Lenses F2.8 of F4.0 ?

Go to last post
M

Mario Jesmanowicz

Well-known member
Messages
216
Reaction score
0
Location
Milwaukee USA, US
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me. This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
 
Mario,

I have been using the 70-200mm L4 for over 1 year. I shoot tons of Little League Baseball. Lens is fantastic. I use it mostly with the Kenko Pro 1.4x converter. Have not tried it indoors yet. Great bang for the buck.

brian separa
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
 
a phenomenal lens!!

I use mine all the time. This lens is an incredible value for the money.

-John
 
Hi Mario

If money did not matter, I would choose the 70-200 L (if not the IS one) since it's a faster lens.

but why not the sigma which is as fast and far cheaper?

I don't know a lot about sigma but I have read that it's soft at 2.8.

The canon L has good performances at 2.8.

That explains the price difference, due to a far better quality.

You could find a used one in good conditions for the price of a new 70-200 F4.

The F4 is not as fast but very sharp and not so bulky and it can be an excellent choice too.
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
 
Will you be shooting primarily outdoors? If so the Canon 70-200L f4.0 is a great lens. Very sharp, light, and much cheaper than the Canon 70-200L f2.8. Outdoors, during daylight the 1 stop difference shouln't be a big deal.

If you are shooting indoors or lowlight in general, I'd say go for the 70-200 f2.8 and if possible, go for the 70-200L f2.8 IS.

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f4.0:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1357378
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357379
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357380

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS:

http://www.pbase.com/image/994633
http://www.pbase.com/image/994635
http://www.pbase.com/image/994638

Joo
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
--- Canon D-30 & PowerShot S100- Maybe one day I'll take a decent picture. In the meantime, I'll blame the equipment. :)
 
The classic dilemma....

Spend more or Spend less?

Face it...you are going to spend your money. Even if you "save" by buying a slower lens...you are going to take that money and spend it on something else.

So...make yourself happy. Buy what you really want.

IF you are shooting indoors...go for speed (regardless of manufacturer).

IF you are shooting outdoors...it is not such a problem.

IF you want a blurred background and think you will shoot wide open....go for the faster lens.

IF you buy things and then regret not spending more on the "better" item...then put all your dollars on the more expensive lens (f2.8 Canon).

Hope that helps,

Steadman
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
 
thanks for the sample on the 3rd one for f4.0 how far away were to achieve that deph of field. Again can I achieve in door from around 15-20 feet
Joo said:
If you are shooting indoors or lowlight in general, I'd say go for
the 70-200 f2.8 and if possible, go for the 70-200L f2.8 IS.

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f4.0:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1357378
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357379
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357380

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS:

http://www.pbase.com/image/994633
http://www.pbase.com/image/994635
http://www.pbase.com/image/994638

Joo
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
--
  • Canon D-30 & PowerShot S100
  • Maybe one day I'll take a decent picture. In the meantime, I'll
blame the equipment. :)
Click to expand...
 
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
thanks for the sample on the 3rd one for f4.0 how far away were to
achieve that deph of field. Again can I achieve in door from around
15-20 feet
Click to expand...
You can check the DoF for any lens at the Canon Camera site. The information for the f4L is here.
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/ef/data/ef_70~200_4l_usm_dof.html
At 200mm F4 and 10m ( 15'), the sharp zone is 9.663-10.361m or 0.6m ( 2') wide.

If you really want want to blow out the background, you should try to get closer to the subject and place the subject further away from the background. --xsy
 
To my way of thinking there is a 2 sided way to look at purchases. If you are new to it and think you will likely do some upgrading or changing in the forseeable future, than go for the Sigma. If you are looking LONG term and plan on this being a more permanent move, then indeed the Canon is the way to go. Had your budget been more flexible I'd have recommended you just get a 70-200 2.8IS L and call it a day for a year as frankly, I have 8 lenses (mostly L's) and that lens is now my official favorite. Others will poo poo the Image Stabiliztion thing but frankly, there ARE times it more than earns it's keep. Again that would indeed be a LONG TERM decision and not one you would likely EVER change. Your money........
 
The 70-200 f4 is as I understand it an excellent outdoor lense. I have also read that if indoor lighting is poor that the f2.8 won't be fast enough anyway. I would go for thr 70-200 f4 for outdoor and select a fast lense for indoors such as the 50 1.4, 50 1.8, 85 1.8, ot the 100 f2. These lenses range from $85 to $450.

http://www.canogacameras.com click lenses, canon
http://www.photodo.com click products
http://www.photo.net click equipment

This is - of course - because money don't grow on trees - unfortunately

http://www.jim-kelly.com

Good luck with you difficult decison.
 
You have to watch your backgrounds when using the f4.0 at anything less than 200mm. It's bokeh ( if you're doing portraits you should learn about this term) is not good at all. The examples I've seen from the 2.8 look better but I can't comment since I don't have the 2.8. I'm looking to get a prime rather than trying to keep editing the f4.0's weirdness.
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
 
My fault for having some big white thing in the background, but I think the DOF and Bokeh is pretty nice:



Here's another where I wasn't so close to him:



I haven't carried the 2.8, but if memory serves it weighs twice what the 4.0 does. BobT
 
I was standing only a couple feet away from the subject. But the background was probably about 20-30 feet away.

Joo
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
Joo said:
If you are shooting indoors or lowlight in general, I'd say go for
the 70-200 f2.8 and if possible, go for the 70-200L f2.8 IS.

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f4.0:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1357378
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357379
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357380

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS:

http://www.pbase.com/image/994633
http://www.pbase.com/image/994635
http://www.pbase.com/image/994638

Joo
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
--
  • Canon D-30 & PowerShot S100
  • Maybe one day I'll take a decent picture. In the meantime, I'll
blame the equipment. :)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--- Canon D-30 & PowerShot S100- Maybe one day I'll take a decent picture. In the meantime, I'll blame the equipment. :)
 
I don't even care about the realbackground, just other back parts of metal have already good enough of blur for me. I can't achieve that with my Minolta D7 at F3.5 at 200mm. It is all sharp. Only when I shoot in macro then the background blurs
Joo said:
Joo
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
Joo said:
If you are shooting indoors or lowlight in general, I'd say go for
the 70-200 f2.8 and if possible, go for the 70-200L f2.8 IS.

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f4.0:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1357378
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357379
http://www.pbase.com/image/1357380

Samples from the Canon 70-200L f2.8 IS:

http://www.pbase.com/image/994633
http://www.pbase.com/image/994635
http://www.pbase.com/image/994638

Joo
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
I want to get that 70-200mm L USM Canon Lens. There are two choices
one at F2.0 and one at F4.0. $1200 is little bit too much for me.
This will be my first lens toward D60 so I also have to get wider
angle like 28-70. I almost gave up on F2.8 but then I saw sigmas
for around $600 70-200 F2.8 and then I went to reviews and also saw
VERY HIGH marks for Canon's 70-200 F4.0. Everyone says it is the
same or sharper as Canon's F2.8 yet only costs $600. It is lighter
and smaller.

So here are my chocice

Would you go with 2.8 Sigma or F4.0 Canon ???
Or would you with ONLY 2.8 Canon and no other lenses for a year ???

Also Some poeople say that F4.0 is VERY SHARP. Would I still be
able to get portraits with it at F4.0 from around 10-15feet, you
know blurred background ???

Is F4.0 usable indoor at games or $600 more really justifies
upgrading for that one F stop. I also understand that F2.8 is
heavy. I do plan on walking with it a lot.

What do you recomend???
Click to expand...
--
  • Canon D-30 & PowerShot S100
  • Maybe one day I'll take a decent picture. In the meantime, I'll
blame the equipment. :)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
  • Canon D-30 & PowerShot S100
  • Maybe one day I'll take a decent picture. In the meantime, I'll
blame the equipment. :)
Click to expand...
 
that is realy nice picture. I can't open the first one (asks for user and pass) but the boy looks extremely sharp. Is it possible to get a little bit more of the blur for the background, or is this already F4 ?

Also everyone tellms to either go for it and get Canon's F2.8 or start with F4, but no one is recomending Sigma's 70-200mm F2.8. THe magazines tell that it is a good lens, I would even then get Sigma's 24-70 F2.8, but no one is telling me anything about this lens. Does anyone have any examples of Sigmas 70-200 F2.8 at 2.8 ?
BobT said:
My fault for having some big white thing in the background, but I
think the DOF and Bokeh is pretty nice:



Here's another where I wasn't so close to him:



I haven't carried the 2.8, but if memory serves it weighs twice
what the 4.0 does. BobT
Click to expand...
 
I can't understand why there is a problem showing the first pic, when the second is fine. They are in the same folder on the same server. I too see a delay, but it eventually shows up. But I'm logged into the domain, so it isn't a fair test.

Did you try clicking the large open white space? I can email it to you if you want to see it, lv your email.

In the first shot, you have much more background blur. The issue is being closer to the subject. The closer you physically are to the subject, the more blur the background gets, given the same F stop.

Here's another (hope it shows up):

 
Mario Jesmanowicz said:
BobT said:
The posts above should show my sample photos now.
Click to expand...
Ye they did. I was able to see the kid in the first photo and that
answered my question :) Also the leave is incredible. Is this on
D30 ???
Click to expand...
Yes, it was.

Here's another. I sort of use this lens as my "macro lens." I zoom all the way, then get as close as I can, which is about 4 1/2 feet. Comes in handy with a subject like this:



This lens is my favorite of those I own, and has sold me on getting more L lenses in the future. Good luck!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top