IS or NON IS - CANON 70-200 f/4


Status
Not open for further replies.

FIRDIE

New Member
Nov 19, 2008
144
0
0
Upper East Coast
#1
Hi all ,i'm intending to get the canon 70-200 f/4 lens but i'm deciding to get the IS or NON-IS one .

Will it make a big difference if i'm taking fast moving action like a soccer match or F1 cars or general photography ?Is worth investing in that lens with IS ?Is it worth the price ..?

And lastly some comments on the lens OTHER THAT ITS HEAVY AND EXPENSIVE !

Thanks all for your time
 

flipfreak

Senior Member
Nov 26, 2007
7,030
0
36
Singapore
www.rogerchua.com
#3
Hi all ,i'm intending to get the canon 70-200 f/4 lens but i'm deciding to get the IS or NON-IS one .

Will it make a big difference if i'm taking fast moving action like a soccer match or F1 cars or general photography ?Is worth investing in that lens with IS ?Is it worth the price ..?

And lastly some comments on the lens OTHER THAT ITS HEAVY AND EXPENSIVE !

Thanks all for your time
i thought its pretty light and value for $$$. its less than 1kg right?
 

axelris

New Member
Dec 16, 2008
39
0
0
#5
Definitely IS :thumbsup:
 

estel

New Member
Jul 17, 2006
344
0
0
#6
Will it make a big difference if i'm taking fast moving action like a soccer match or F1 cars or general photography ?
Definitely IS :thumbsup:
did you care to read the question before answering?

TS, IS is almost useless if you want to stop the motion of the *subject*. IS can only stop your own camera shake. What you need to stop subject motion is a higher shutter speed, which means larger apeture (in the lens) or higher ISO (in the camera). If your shutter speed is fast enough to stop F1 motion, your pictures won't likely be affected much by camera shaking anyway.

IS unit doesn't add a lot to weight. Difference is minimal you won't even notice. However, f/2.8 version is much heavier than f/4 version, but it will help you shoot at shutter speeds twice as fast.
 

Last edited:

stanycjw

Senior Member
Dec 25, 2008
2,063
2
38
Singapore
#7
Hi all ,i'm intending to get the canon 70-200 f/4 lens but i'm deciding to get the IS or NON-IS one .

Will it make a big difference if i'm taking fast moving action like a soccer match or F1 cars or general photography ?Is worth investing in that lens with IS ?Is it worth the price ..?

And lastly some comments on the lens OTHER THAT ITS HEAVY AND EXPENSIVE !

Thanks all for your time
Suggest to get IS, it.s a must if like F1. reduce burr and able to stop dn by 2 stop.
I sold my 70-300 w/o IS and replaced w IS.

Really worth to pay a sight higher $$$.
 

estel

New Member
Jul 17, 2006
344
0
0
#8
Suggest to get IS, it.s a must if like F1. reduce burr and able to stop dn by 2 stop.
Could you please explain how stopping down two stops (= four times slower shutter speed) can help stop blur of fast moving cars?
 

Jan 27, 2009
25
0
0
#9
Could you please explain how stopping down two stops (= four times slower shutter speed) can help stop blur of fast moving cars?
Estel is right....IS is for shaky hands laa..not fast cars :p
 

FIRDIE

New Member
Nov 19, 2008
144
0
0
Upper East Coast
#10
Does anyone know why this lens for canon is so much more ex than for nikon ?I saw one guy sellign 70-200 f/2.8 VR 2touch for $800 plus i think .Now this for canon is 3k plus BN ..why sia ?
 

fredlens

New Member
Nov 18, 2007
55
0
0
#11
why is everyone talking about the 70-200 but not the 100-400 L Lens???
i thought its coverage is better?
 

Trapper

New Member
Sep 25, 2008
288
0
0
fr0z.multiply.com
#12
TS also asked about "general" photography. Since he didn't say what he meant by that, recommending the IS version is par for the course. If you're only shooting F1, IS does not matter; if you're getting the lens for F1 alone though, why buy at all, just rent.
 

Jul 27, 2008
472
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#14
Although the IS won't stop motion,
I support "IS" if your budget permits.

Reason:
At 200mm, any motion detected from our wobbly hands will be greatly amplified... (as compared to the EFS 17-55 IS USM) Having the "IS" greatly increases the hand holdability of the lens at its long end.

Further more, at dimmer situation, the "IS" allows you to have longer exposures hand held. This is compensates for the smaller aperure as compared to the 70-200 F2.8 variants although still not to its equivalent.

Lastly, the weight increment between the IS and non IS variants are neligible. The thing to consider more is the budget you are willing to spend. If budget allows, "IS" is definitely the way to go.

Just my two cents~
 

Last edited:
Jul 27, 2008
472
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#15
Oh btw,

Your F1 cars at shot in the night?

Under normal lighting conditions, the F4 variant should do fine (though i haven tried shooting F1). If not, what body you are using? Try bumping up of ISO is another cheap alternative to buying the f2.8 variant. (this option is even more apprarent with the new 5DmkII which is uber godly in its ISO control.
)
 

frankchn

New Member
Dec 8, 2008
297
0
0
#16
One more vote for IS here. IS really helps if you are going to use the lens as a more general purpose lens. If you are only intent on shooting F1 cars or such at night, you should just rent a 300/2.8 or something =p
 

Oct 2, 2007
4
0
0
#17
That's because L comes with a different price tag altogether...
 

cg171s

New Member
Jul 20, 2006
408
1
0
Auckland
#19
For your purpose, I think the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is more suitable.

But, between the f/4.. get the IS version.. You won't regret it.:thumbsup:
 

WINDyx

New Member
Nov 24, 2008
85
0
0
26
#20
As long it's telephoto , definitely IS for me...
My hands are not that steady enough for shots at 200mm.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom