Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Advice please , canon 70-200 f/2.8Lusm or 70-200 f/4 is usm

Sbar1 7 1
1 Jul 2010 8:03PM
Not sure which way to go, non is 2.8 or is f/4, will be shooting some motorsport & some portrait/ travel candids, mostly hand held work. open to advice, thanks Sbar 1

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

davey_griffo 8 213 165 England
1 Jul 2010 8:55PM
I don't use Canon myself, so I don't know these specific lenses, but in general terms, I'd say your choices are:

If it's a straight choice, & you can afford either, seems like a no-brainer. Go for the fast lens. You'll only wish you had at some time in the future.
If you have a certain amount to spend, & want another lens or accessory with what's left, go for the f4, as the extra stop may prove less useful than the other item.

You've not really been specific enough about why there's a choice. Is it budget, thinking you may not need the extra stop/expense, thinking of buying something else at the same time?
Doglet 11 59 United Kingdom
1 Jul 2010 9:04PM
Well I am only an amateur at this but I would go for the 2.8 it will give you a broader scope in taking pics. I have one and it is great.Grin
Overread 9 4.1k 19 England
1 Jul 2010 10:07PM
The way I see it is like this:
Both lenses are going to be sharp and optically sound choices, the f4 version is even generally rated at being a hair sharper than the f2.8 at f4 - however we are splitting hairs here as both are very high grade to start with. So I would not worry about overall optical quality from either.

Secondly you have aperture - the f2.8 offers you wider max aperture and the option of more light to be used in dimmer conditions whilst also giving you the creative option of being able to shoot at f2.8. Further more if you consider using a 1.4 teleconverter the f2.8 again gives you more aperture to work with in comparison to the f4.

Thirdly you have size and weight, the f2.8 is larger and noticably heavier than the f4. This is sometimes the major point for most people and the first time you see/use an f2.8 it feels massive and overweight. However (and this comes from someone who is not big nor muscly) the f2.8 version is certainly within most peoples capabilities to grow used to and given a month of so of good use and you can easily use it.

Fourthly there is IS - something that the f4 version gives you that the f2.8 lacks. Remember though that this is only going to counter your handshake motions. For something like motorsport this might not be an issue as you push for faster shutter speeds.
There is a 70-200mm f2.8 IS L however its not out of production with second hand going for about its original new retail cost and its retail cost being totally out of control (most places just have no stock at all). The M2 of this lens is a massive jump in price from the others you're considering so whilst I'll throw it into the pot to consider I suspect its far more in cost that you are willing to invest.
StrayCat Plus
14 19.1k 3 Canada
2 Jul 2010 5:29AM
A hair here, a hair there.....Wink
whipspeed 13 4.2k 22 United Kingdom
2 Jul 2010 8:30AM
After owning both of the lenses, I'd recommend the f2.8 for sport I found the f4 slower than the f2.8 & I didn't use the IS as it slows the focus down. It is heavier, but you soon get used to it.
Coleslaw 12 13.4k 28 Wales
2 Jul 2010 8:38AM
Having owned a F4 before, and now a 2.8 IS, I could definitely recommend you to get the 2.8, even it is non IS.
Sbar1 7 1
2 Jul 2010 7:28PM
Thanks guys for your collective advice, Overread spot on my friend the 70/200mm f2.8is11 is more than i have to invest just now, with the other two lenses both in the region of 1000.00. Thanks again look forward to try my new 70/200mmf2.8usm Sbar1
LensYews 9 1.3k 1 United Kingdom
2 Jul 2010 11:39PM
The factor that might influence the choice is your travel requirement, the f2.8 is heavy, and if you are planning to fly a lot, the f4 IS might be the better choice. I have the f2.8 IS and it starts taking its toll on my wrist strenght after a few hours use.
Late 7 9
3 Jul 2010 9:07PM
I chose the f/4 IS version. It is half the weight of the f/2.8 versions, which are really heavy lenses - about the same as the very substantial 100-400L. Get to try before you buy Wink

F/2.8 is obvioulsy nice to have, but unless you use it on a fairly regular basis you are carrying it about for no benefit. Also, looking at the two lenses you have selected, you will miss out on the finest incarnation of Canon's four-stops IS system, which is arguably more useful than an extra stop of aperture. Plus the f/4 lens is fractionally sharper, it has weather sealing and a cirular diaphragm for nicer out-of-focus background effects.
AndyLeslie 8 141 8 Wales
14 Jul 2010 9:30AM
I've taken many sports and wildlife shots with my f/4 lens and always been thankful that it's so light in comparison to the f/2.8 and never really suffered by my choice, especially with the 1.4x extender.

However, remember that the f/2.8 can be used with the 2x extender as well as the 1.4x, whilst retaining autofocus, a plus point that can be very useful.
pulsar69 13 1.6k 6 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2010 1:12PM
or dont forget the excellent 200mm prime which i have just posted this photo from !

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.