Would 2.8 compensate F4 IS?

[maniax]

The 70-200mm F4 IS and the 70-200mm F2.8 are around the same price.. I don't have the cash to get a 2.8 IS version.

How much would f2.8 compensate the IS of the F4 version?

 

[TomFid]

The IS gets you, conservatively, 2 or 3 stops of handholdability, which beats the 1 stop advantage of the 2.8 over the f4. The f4 is quite a bit lighter and also focuses closer, as I recall.

The 2.8 gets you a brighter finder image, shallower depth of field (if you want it), ability to use the most precise focus sensors, and an extra stop for moving subjects (where IS won't help).

Tom

 

[bobbyz]

If it is anthing that's moving then I will atke the f2.8 non-IS version.

BTW - Why you inclining towards the f4 IS version?

--
Bobby

http://bobbyz.smugmug.com

 

[ed rader]

altho there's a narrow window in low light where the f2.8 will stop motion a bit better the bigger zoom is no way as versatile as the f4 IS.

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[ed rader]

the only canon lens with it.

so lets say 3-4 stops .

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[TomFid]

Yeah ... I've wondered how real that is ... perhaps I was being too conservative!

Tom

 

[Lemming51]

altho there's a narrow window in low light where the f2.8 will stop
motion a bit better the bigger zoom is no way as versatile as the
f4 IS.

Define "versatile". ;-)
The f/2.8 is more versatile with teleconverters.

 

[TimoH]

F2.8 stops motion slightly better than f4. On the other hand, F4IS provides much more handholdability (3-4 stops) than F2.8 non-IS. Combine this with the much lighter weight of the F4IS and you have the winner.

Timo

 

[TimeSpaceMotion]

IS doesnt stop motion remember that. It just gives you the ability to handhold, thats it. If its a low light situation and the subjects are moving then you would want the 2.8...

2.8 gives you more shutter speed.

I am in the same situation too. The way I see it though is if youre willing to spend that much in the first place, whats a bit more to get the IS version of the 2.8...

Go big or go home right? ;P goodluck.

 

[ed rader]

if that's your ideal of versatility you should be pleased that the price of the f2.8 is cratering .

btw, the f4 IS is smoking with a 1.4 TC.

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[eelnoraa]

If you don't use tripod, IS makes a huge difference in this focal length range especailly at the 200mm end.

One step of shutter is nothing for stopping motion. The only reason to go for F2.8 non-IS over F4IS is the bokeh, view finer and F2.8 high sensitive AF sensor.

eel

 

[brianric]

Twice as much light coming in, shallower depth of field. IMO, IS is over rated.

altho there's a narrow window in low light where the f2.8 will stop
motion a bit better the bigger zoom is no way as versatile as the
f4 IS.

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could
identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[Lemming51]

if that's your ideal of versatility you should be pleased that the
price of the f2.8 is cratering .

That is one defilnition of versatility. "Cratering"? It's only $100 less now than when I bought mine 5 years ago.

btw, the f4 IS is smoking with a 1.4 TC.

As is the f/2.8L. And it is always 1 stop faster than the f/4 with or w/o a TC, giving better AF performance in all lighting conditions. With the 1.4 TC the f/2.8L is still f/4 and give high precision AF on the 1-series bodies, the f/4L becomes f/5.6 and operates in standard precision on all models. With 2x the f/2.8L is f/5.6 and will AF with all EOS bodies. The f/4L +2x will AF only with 1-series.

 

[AOKH]

We really can't recommend one until the OP specifies intended use ...
Both lenses are surely great.

if that's your ideal of versatility you should be pleased that the
price of the f2.8 is cratering .

That is one defilnition of versatility. "Cratering"? It's only
$100 less now than when I bought mine 5 years ago.

btw, the f4 IS is smoking with a 1.4 TC.

As is the f/2.8L. And it is always 1 stop faster than the f/4 with
or w/o a TC, giving better AF performance in all lighting
conditions. With the 1.4 TC the f/2.8L is still f/4 and give high
precision AF on the 1-series bodies, the f/4L becomes f/5.6 and
operates in standard precision on all models. With 2x the f/2.8L
is f/5.6 and will AF with all EOS bodies. The f/4L +2x will AF
only with 1-series.

 

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

If you don't use tripod, IS makes a huge difference in this focal
length range especailly at the 200mm end.

No, not at all - that is, unless your subject is stationary.

One step of shutter is nothing for stopping motion. The only
reason to go for F2.8 non-IS over F4IS is the bokeh, view finer and
F2.8 high sensitive AF sensor.

One step from 1/125 to 1/250 means that you can mostly get sharp images of slowly moving people. A step from 1/250 to 1/500 sec. means you can stop rather brisk action.

IS is of no help in either case. I own two lenses with IS, and I would take a fast lens over a slower with IS every time. IS is very practical only when your subjects do not move.

Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway

 

[ed rader]

.... will get you a latte at starbucks .

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[ed rader]

that';s why the 70-200L is dropping like a hot rock on the aftermarket and will probably be discontinued soon if it hasn't already been dumped by canon.

ed rader
--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[dchao]

-no text-

 

[brianric]

and yours is like an AH, they stink!

.... will get you a latte at starbucks .

ed rader

--



'One often has mixed feelings about relatives, but few people could
identify serious problems in their relationships with dogs.'

-- Anonymous

 

[carlk]

Not true. Without IS I can not get consistent blur free hand held images at the long end below 1/250s. I do have the f2.8 IS lens but for me the IS is way more important than the speed. F2.8 is nice to have but IS is a must.

If you don't use tripod, IS makes a huge difference in this focal
length range especailly at the 200mm end.

No, not at all - that is, unless your subject is stationary.

One step of shutter is nothing for stopping motion. The only
reason to go for F2.8 non-IS over F4IS is the bokeh, view finer and
F2.8 high sensitive AF sensor.

One step from 1/125 to 1/250 means that you can mostly get sharp
images of slowly moving people. A step from 1/250 to 1/500 sec.
means you can stop rather brisk action.

IS is of no help in either case. I own two lenses with IS, and I
would take a fast lens over a slower with IS every time. IS is very
practical only when your subjects do not move.

Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway