Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Well, if you use a tripod the IS will not help and will actually blur your images. Especially on longer exposures over 1/2 second. I have the 24-105L IS and I turn off the IS except for rare hand held shots. If you are hand holding and taking candid shots, then the f4 IS will more than make up for the loss of speed with the 2.8 one. However, if you want narrow DOF, get the 2.8. It you want it light, get the f4. There are just a bunch of tradeoffs here.
I will eventually get the 2.8 with no IS. But I do landscapes on a tripod.
Patrick
Really? In what way is it better? I was told that there was little degridation using a converter, and it still maintained autofocus etc... Is it a quality issue, or focus speed issue? I wouldn't want to waste £200 on the wrong one, although a trip to Jessops or LCE to try them first would be in order. 
I have used the mk11 2x convertor and a 70-200 non is for 0ver5 years now, on a lot of cameras it doesnt auto focus at all , even with a eos1dmk2n and a 600mm f4 is it leads to some softening of the image and auto focus sometimes works sometimes doesnt
on lesser dlsrs like the d60 it virtually wouldnt work and needed manual focus!!!
a 2x convertor is not a shortcut to a long lens but a comprimise
the1.4 works very well with most of the lenses includig the100-400
also take into consideration you will losev two stops of light with a 2x convertor, not a huge problem with a 2.8 but more problems with a f4 or 5.6
looking at what you want to do photographic wise I would go for a 17-40mm to open up backgrounds whilst getting close to targets
Hi
Just to stick my nose in ... I'd go for the F4 is over the 2.8 non i.s
Paul is right about the convertors tho ... you will get some softening with the x2 but hardly any with the x1.4
The F4 is the new system and will work fine on the tripod with the IS activated. It will also offer upto 4 stops of stability whereas the old one offers only 2-3. I have the old F4 non IS as well as a number of other pieces of L glass. The older F4 is still a great lens, but i wouldnt even swa[ that for a 2.8 non IS ... the only thing that would tempt me would be the f2.8IS version.
Whichever you go for you are getting good glass .. remember that!
Dan
I have heard from some quarters Dan that the non is versions of the 70-200 2.8 have the edge on sharpness, I hav e the non is version and two of my togs have the is cant really see any difference myself either way. could certainly see the difference when one had a 2.8 sigma though!!!!
if you travel through hongkong buy one there, the price diffenrec between the uk is staggering orthe us is very well priced with the dollar being so low
Hi
Quite a few people say the non i.s is sharper ... ive had both at various stages to play with and to be honest couldnt tell the difference on the examples i had .. then again I actually struggle to tell the difference in sharpness between the F4 and the F2.8.
Agree about the sigma generally but had a go with the F2.8 macro last week and it was actually very good! Not as sharp wide open as the canon but not too much in it.
Dan
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Olympus 'Portraiture' Competition - Win £1000 Worth Of Gear!
30th April 2013 - 31st May 2013
This month, to celebrate the launch of Olympus' new micro site Olympus Image Space, Olympus are giving you the chance to win £1000 worth of Olympus gear!...
Featured e2 Photo
May'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.
