Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I have experience in both but brought the 70-200mm f2.8 is usm ii and is the best lens i have in my arsenal, it is so sharp it cuts.
the speed of auto focus is extremely quick, i find it difficult to get bad images with this lens attached to my 7d, and when i use it for sport or wild life, when the shots are needed it is the tool to use.
Put the 1.4 or 2.0 extender on this lens and you still have a superb lens that auto focuses and the f stop is 5.6 through out the range which is very acceptable.
The 70-200 f4 i just would not go there, straight away your at f4 and if you wish to use an extender like a 1.4 or 2.0 then your f4 will end up f6.5 or higher and you will have no auto focus either.
Its like most things in life, pay your money and get the best.
Ian.
The advice above is incorrect, you will retain auto focus with a 1.4X extender on the 70-200mm f4 lens.
Regarding image quality and sharpness, I would be most surprised if you saw any difference worth mentioning between either lens.
My choice between the two lenses would be, and was, the f4 version for the following reason's. I don't need the wider aperture of the f2.8, I don't want the weight, bulk or price premium of the f2.8 version, I have no intention of using a 2X extender on it. Therefore, I chose the 70-200mm f4 over the f2.8 model and I would happily make the same choice again if needed.
One model isn't necessarily better than the other, it all depends on your requirements and whether you feel the faster lens will be beneficial for the type of photography you do.
I agree with Justin. The f4 is still a great lens and it works well with the 1.4 converter. If you don't need that extra stop then go for the cheaper and much lighter f4.
I started with the f4, and changed it out for the f2.8 (non-IS) and some days after carting the bigger lens around all day I wish I still had an f4 version.
I have used both and can recommend the f2.8 non IS as it's the lens I use 99% of the time for sports photography. I found the f4 was ok, but when used at the velodrome it didn't deliver the results & the IS slowed the focus down even more. I subsequently sold it and purchased the f2.8 non IS and haven't looked back, it produces pin sharp results outdoors and also at the veldrome.
Yes it's a heavier lens, but I don't find that a problem.
Sarah
same here i had the non IS & still have but i did buy the IS version & sold it i thought it was rubbish to soft at the 200mm end even worse with the 1.4 extender on . read here but the new one is really good read here. i don't think it's heavy at all , i now use the canon 28/300 more often now that is a heavy lens to walk around with. the other lens you ask about is very good as well read here
I moved from the F4 to the 2.8 non IS, and can honestly say I have noticed no difference in image quality. I only upgraded because I wanted the extra stop for low light and action photography.
This was taken with the F4, and I was more than happy with the sharpness. 
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Vanguard June 'Landscape' Competition - Win TIPA Awarded Gear!
1st June 2013 - 30th June 2013
This month, Vanguard are giving you the chance to get your hands on TIPA 2013 awarded gear in our 'Landscape' competition.Up for grabs are two ABEO Pro 2...
Featured e2 Photo
June's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
