70-200MM query

[quain]

Hi, recently I keep on thinking of some queries on 70-200mm lens. Hope I could get some advice here.

As we noe there is 4 type of 70-200 lens.
F2.8 non IS
F2.8 IS
F4 IS
F4 non IS

I have been reading alot on the lens, but was confuse with the review.

There are review stating that IS version can produce better IQ, but there is also review stating tat there is no differences the only different is the IS.

Also, reading on different between F4 and F2.8, some state that IQ for f2.8 is better n tack sharp but some state that there is no different, the only different between the 2 is f2.8 can allow u to take pic where lighting is not very good(understandable cox aperture is bigger), of cox also f2.8 can create good bokeh. But I was wondering if using f4 with flash, n other setting like iso and shutter speed can I still produce same good IQ with f4 as Compare to f2.8 of cox not comparing the bokeh they produce.

I am using a 6D FF, so review say when use f2.8 on FF u really can see the different compare to f4 in terms of IQ.

So I really dun which is true on the above info I collected. Why am I asking because I am using a F4 non IS now, was pending whether is it worth or needed to change to F2.8 non IS, if my concern is image quality, also if change to F2.8, will there be a lot different between the IS and non IS in term of image quality.

Really need advice from u guys. Thanks.

 

[G-man]

Rent an f/4 and f/2.8, both IS and try out for yourself. As you probably can tell from all your reading, the results are subjective. Only you can decide if the extra weight and price are worth it for 2.8

 

[SkyStrike]

What are you going/intending to shoot with the 70-200?

If you are just going to shoot landscape with this lens, you won't see the diff with any of the above.

But if you are going to shoot low light events/sports, go for the f2.8 version.

IS or not depends heavily on what you shoot too. if you are shooting at high shutter speed, is fine matter to much.

Talking about sharpness, how big a print are you going to make? 20R, 30R or just Facebook upload? Personally, I would worry about other stuffs than sharpness...

 

[dodgethis]

Buy the f2.8 IS MkII and you will not have to worry about anything ever again.

"Man, I wish I had that IS."
"Man, I wish I had that f2.8 aperture."
"Man, I wish I had that awesome sharpness wide-open"

 

[Marcus]

Buy the f2.8 IS MkII and you will not have to worry about anything ever again.

"Man, I wish I had that IS."
"Man, I wish I had that f2.8 aperture."
"Man, I wish I had that awesome sharpness wide-open"

thats what I'm looking at too, but it is too exp haha..

 

[dodgethis]

If you want the best, be prepared to spend money. No point saying too ex. If you think it's worth, spend the money. No point wallowing in self-pity.

 

[nedy77]

Other than the IQ of the lenses, another consideration is the size as weight of the lenses. The f2.8 lenses are much bigger and heavier than the f4 lenses. If you are walking and shooting for a couple of hours, it's going to be a burden

 

[Monkutt]

If you want the best, be prepared to spend money. No point saying too ex. If you think it's worth, spend the money. No point wallowing in self-pity.

Totally agree with this. Bit the bullet and got the f/2.8 IS II and have been loving it ever since. One plus point here is that it is one fast lens. Try it out in a shop or head down to the Canon showrooms and you'll fall in love with it.

Cheers!

 

[ManWearPants]

I have the f2.8 IS before selling for the f4 IS. Didn't look back. The size is much more manageable than the f2.8 IS. But as mentioned above, if you simply want the BoB, then f2.8 IS II is the one to go for.

IS is more useable as I have poor hand holding techniques. I have tried lenses in this focal length without IS and a lot of images appear blur due to movement on my part.

So you need to know what works for you.

 

[ricohflex]

So I really dun which is true on the above info I collected.

Unable to comment on the F2.8 IS or the F4 IS models.

Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L non-IS

Tack sharp wide open at F2.8
Proven after long usage taking Velvia slides.

 

[Marcus]

If you want the best, be prepared to spend money. No point saying too ex. If you think it's worth, spend the money. No point wallowing in self-pity.

i agreed what u said but I just can't afford it at the moment thats y i say its exp. have to save up~ haha

 

[tecnica]

one thing to note, is that the IS versions are not just with the addition of IS but also optically redesigned, which means better image quality over the non-IS versions.

f4 or f2.8, both are VERY GOOD at wide opened. it all boils down to your needs and wants plus of cause' your budget.

you will not go wrong with any of them.

 

[Kenneth67C]

This has been discussed many, many, many times.
I get a bit tired repeating...lol

There are many many reviews that confirm that the IS versions of both f4 and f2.8 are better optically than the non-IS versions.
Whoever said they are the same just doesn't know what they are talking about.

Between f4 IS and f2.8 IS II, the later is really optically superior in every way. The later lens can produce pics the former cannot in terms of bokeh and sharpness.

Why it is worth to spend once and get it mkII:
It covers the 70-200 range so that you don't need to get primes, unless you absolutely need a faster lens.
Effectively you are buying, 85, 100, 135, 200mm all rolled into one. It is as sharp as the primes and gives better bokeh than the 85 f1.8 and as good as the 135L.

The main drawback is the weight, but this is a bit overrated IMO. Some pp can handle it, its a question of technique.

 

[zhangziajoila]

Im happy with f4 non is specially with the good source of light,, use extrnal flash in times of very low light situation,, doubling the price for an IS?? Woooaaahhh a big NO!!! IS never helps for moving subject,,it only help your shaky hands..iq sometimes non is relatively better..that is why im always bringing the lighter lens than the with IS(heavy),,never gives me extra iq.. Imo..

 

[zzyzx]

i would advice to get the IS version for tele lens.

as for f/2,8 or f/4, both got pro and cons. i own both before and both can produce good images. however the major consideration for myself will be f/2,8 + heavy lens vs f/4 + light lens. the weigh difference could be big. if you dun need the f/2,8, i think the f/4 will be much better and stays with you where ever you go more often.

my 2 cents only. like the bros mentioned, rent both lens and try. esp see if you can handle the weigh of the f/2,8's.

 

[dodgethis]

Im happy with f4 non is specially with the good source of light,, use extrnal flash in times of very low light situation,, doubling the price for an IS?? Woooaaahhh a big NO!!! IS never helps for moving subject,,it only help your shaky hands..iq sometimes non is relatively better..that is why im always bringing the lighter lens than the with IS(heavy),,never gives me extra iq.. Imo..

The f4 IS model weighs 760g while the non-IS comes in at 705g. Not significantly heavier. Also, will you always have the luxury of shooting at high shutter speeds and the chance to use flash?

 

[Pr0t0type]

The f4 IS model weighs 760g while the non-IS comes in at 705g. Not significantly heavier. Also, will you always have the luxury of shooting at high shutter speeds and the chance to use flash?

Based on his replies, he seem to own both the IS and non IS of 70-200 since he "always bringing the lighter lens than the with IS(heavy)"

Maybe he could enlighten us on how the non IS gave him the extra image quality. I am very curious since he used both and always picked the non IS.

 

[Snoweagle]

Should be 5 types...including the 70-200 f/2.8 II IS.

 

[Learnphotography]

many have said, a good camera is the one you have with you.

so i think a good lens is the one you will actually bring out. if 2.8 is too big and staying at home, its value equals zero. please consider the size.

for sure 2.8 has better subject isolation, but remember f4 is good too.

finally, good composition, lighting and message stand the most impact in a good photograph. so f2.8 is not 'godly' 'ultimate' 'must have'

 

[cjl]

Hi guys. How abt the mentioned lenses for Canon 7D instead, a cropped body? I am taking concert photos for school and I think my 17-55 really can't reach far enough....

Still deciding if I should get this in HK in 2 days time......