70-200 F 2.8 L (Non IS) or F4 IS ???

[rahulharidas]

hi,

i am confused between 70-200 2.8 L (Non - IS) and F4 IS, which one to buy?..my  budget doest allow me to go for the 2.8 IS

So please guide me here...i shoot concerts , events & weddings.

Thanks in advance

[drsouvik]

Some days back I was in the same confusion
I bought 70-200 4L IS, because of only IS. In long focal range IS is very useful IMO. Anyway, both are excellent lens. I have tested both of them before buying.

[rahulharidas]

Thank you doctor!..i have used the 70-200 2.8 Non IS version..found it lil heavy to handle, especially when you have to shoot handheld for 2-3 hrs..Low light is the major concern though..how is the IQ of F4 IS in low light?..

[drsouvik]

I have not tested this lens in low light, but it is very sharp no doubt. And it is practically free from CA.

[toofan]

As per budget 70-200 f4 lens. heard very good things about both of these lenses.

[lightwave]

Personally I would prefer the 2.8. Faster is always better. Lack of IS can be made up for.

[Brendon]

There might be times that you may leave the f2.8 at home since its much bigger and heavier than the f4 version.

Sharpness wise there won't be much difference between the two since both are very sharp lenses.

However IS can be required since the f2.8 lens is heavy.

That said there are times you may want to blur the background and f2.8 can come in real handy. Also in case you use a 2X TC then AF will work only with the f2.8 version.

EDIT : BTW I don't own either lens so I dunno differences in AF and build quality. My sharpness remarks come purely from online tests. I use a Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 which is similar to the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 in size and weight. I haven't used f2.8 much but in places where light is low f2.8 can be lifesaver if you still wish to freeze the action without going into ridiculously high ISOs

[rahulharidas]

Thanks guys..i tested a 70-200 F4 IS...and felt it like a feather compared to the F 2.8...very good lens..but considering my requirements (shooting under low light) i think f 2.8 wins the race.. and for IS *sigh*..i'll have to rely on my IS hands i guess

[drsouvik]

At what price you are getting 70-200 f2.8?

[rahulharidas]

Foto centre is selling the Non-IS version for Rs 75,500 /- (wit bill + warranty)

[Brendon]

VAT might be extra. Please check that also.

Its 86k for the same lens on smartshoppers.in

Also why not consider Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS version for 74k ?

Its probably just a hairs softer than the Canon version (non OS) but has OS and is cheaper to boot !

Do check the sample you get for FF/BF but since you are buying with warranty you can get it adjusted for your body for free at the Sigma center IF you have a problem.

However all the user reviews of this lens on amazon.com are positive with no negative review so it seems Sigma's new lenses are better QC wise.

[drsouvik]

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS does not have good reputation on dpreview 

[sandy9868]

I bought 70-200 4L IS, because of only IS. In long focal range IS is very useful IMO. Anyway, both are excellent lens. I have tested both of them before buying.

Ditto, even i had purchased the f4IS over 2.8 non IS.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks guys..i tested a 70-200 F4 IS...and felt it like a feather compared to the F 2.8...very good lens..but considering my requirements (shooting under low light) i think f 2.8 wins the race.. and for IS *sigh*..i'll have to rely on my IS hands i guess 

here question is the low light photography...hmmm...well without non IS, how far one can go..1/10 NO..1/30 NO/YES....1/60 YES. So 2.8 non IS good at & upto 1/50...done.

f4IS comes with true 4stop advantage so one can take the sharp shot even at 1/15 handheld. I personally got sharp shots at 1/6 handheld (though majority of them are waste) but at 1/10 onwards its bless.

I hope you get my point.

[Brendon]

Thankfully in Sony there is no such concerns since all lenses (including 3rd party lenses) are fully stabilized.

@OP - Are you going to shoot handheld most of the time ? Are you going to shoot mostly static subjects ? If yes then consider getting an IS lens.

If you shoot subjects that can move then consider the f2.8 version to get a better chance of freezing the scene.

[sandy9868]

^^ he shot event and weddings.

[Brendon]

Ah then IS isn't as required as a faster aperture to freeze action. In that case f2.8 is preferred unless the OP is intent on using flash all the time.

[ISO]

Personally I would prefer the 2.8. Faster is always better. Lack of IS can be made up for.

+10

It offers many possibilities.

[gops009]

hi,

i am confused between 70-200 2.8 L (Non - IS) and F4 IS, which one to buy?..my  budget doest allow me to go for the 2.8 IS

So please guide me here...i shoot concerts , events & weddings.

Thanks in advance

Confusion  happens.....
F4 IS between 58 to 64 k and 2:8 around 75 K .....if i were u i would stretch mY budget and go for the 2:8   ...in low light 2:8 

[rahulharidas]

@Brendon..i checked..they are selling it for 75,500 only!..i wonder how they manage to sell at such low prices (compared to flipkart,smartshoppers...).. ...even Kashish is selling around the same range.. & the IS version for 125000/-

and i do not use flash..i use it at times just as an AF assist though (yeah! canon AF sucks in low light!#nikonwin)
and yes my subjects tend to be quite frantic..(#metalgigs)..so i think i will need that 2.8 to freeze the action.