EF 70-200 f4 IS -or- EF 70-200 f2.8 non-IS

Started Apr 6, 2011 | Discussions thread
dougr Regular Member • Posts: 395
Re: EF 70-200 f4 IS -or- EF 70-200 f2.8 non-IS

Of course 2.8 is faster than 4... that does not mean indoor sports is a selling point of the 2.8. If indoor sports was the primary use, but the OP still wanted a 70-200 zoom, I'd recommend the 70-200 f4 non-IS and a fast prime (which one depends on the sport). Just giving my .02

andrewsf wrote:
True, 1.8 is better than 2.8 but 2.8 is better than 4. right?

OP - this is pretty much the most asked question in this forum.

I think, in my opinion, that you should buy as much lens as you can afford. A 2.8 lens can shoot at 4.0 but the reverse is not true.

Of course new cameras are getting better high ISO performance but if you had the opportunity to shoot at the same ISO and yeild a better shutter speed, rather than push the ISO up, what would you do?

2.8 IS II is next on my list and I don't suspect I'll regret it one bit.

dougr wrote:

In my limited experience, 2.8 is still too slow for indoor sports if you are trying to stop action... better off with a prime (e.g. 85/1.8)

Peter Kwok wrote:

f2.8 non IS is good for:

  • shallow DOF portraits

  • fast shutter speed, especially indoor sport

f4 IS is good for:

  • low light but no action, e.g. church wedding without flash or tripod

  • travel & walk around

Most lens review sites rate the f4 IS slightly sharper. But in real situations, there is no difference. I picked the f4 IS because it fits my need better.
Peter Kwok
WYSIWYG - If you don't like what you get, try to see differently.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow