Considering Canon IS L lenses

[rtphokie]

• Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM ($1700)
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM ($1060)
• Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM ($1300)

The f4 lens is 2.5 lbs, the f2.8 and f4.5 lenses are both 5lbs.

I'm leaning towards the 70-200mm f4 IS, it looks like it provides very good bang for the buck. However I cant decide if it's worth the extra $500 (the f4 lens doesn't come the $115 tripod mounting ring, the f2.8 does). $500 for nearly double the light but that also doubles the weight.

Anyone own any of these lenses? Any suggestions? Other IS options which provide results this sharp.

 

[Master Mason]

I have the 70-200 f/2.8 but the non IS version. I use it mostly for the kids sports. yes it is heavy but I am very very glad I got the 2.8. There were a few games last season that the lighting was so poor if I didn't have the 2.8 I never would have been able to get a picture.

Depending on what you use it for, I would look seriously at if you need the IS or not.

 

[Anewman]

I agree with Master Mason, if you do any sports get the 2.8(non IS). If not the F4.0 with IS.

 

[boBQuincy]

$500 seemed like a lot for one stop, so I went with the 70-200 f/4. I may miss some shots but probably not many, especially since the lens is very good wide open.
The black tripod mount is a lot less $$$ then the white one and is otherwise identical.

I doubt I would care to carry the f/2.8 around all day either, even the f/4 gets pretty heavy after 12 hours.

Canon's 100-400 has received some not so good reviews.

 

[rtphokie]

Depending on what you use it for, I would look seriously at if you need the IS or not.

I'll use it for anything and everything. Kids sports, visit to the airport to shoot aircraft, nature, pretty much everything outdoors.

Is there a downside to IS other than price, weight and battery life?

 

[Master Mason]

From my understanding it is actually a negative to have it on when the subject is moving. Since the vast majority of my subjects are moving, it wasn't worth 500 to have IS turned off most of the time.

Also, you have to turn it off if your using it with a tripod or monopod.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Skip the 100-400. It sucks. It's not bad optically; it literally sucks. The push/pull design is notorious for sucking in dust.

As for the f/4 vs f/2.8, that's a judgment call. I don't know that the f/4 really needs a tripod ring on a decent tripod, so I wouldn't worry that much about it. The big question is whether you want to cough up the considerable extra dollars and deal with the extra size and weight in order to get another stop. I got the f/2.8 IS and don't regret it, but it is a bit heavy for a walkaround lens. It also draws more attention than I'd like. It's big, obnoxious, and has a tendency to scare people when you point it at them.

 

[boBQuincy]

The f/4 makes them close their eyes in disbelief, "you bought the cheap one, didn't you?"

 

[majimikate]

Bob,

You are too funny...even on a Tuesday morning after a 3 day weekend I'm laughing...very funny!!!

Chris

 

[jann1033]

The f/4 makes them close their eyes in disbelief, "you bought the cheap one, didn't you?"

Mark and bob...

nice shots both of you

bob did you photoshop the background out? it looks great whether you did or didn't just wondering how you got such a beautiful "portrait like" photo otherwise

 

[boBQuincy]

Mark and bob...

nice shots both of you

bob did you photoshop the background out? it looks great whether you did or didn't just wondering how you got such a beautiful "portrait like" photo otherwise

Nope, no editing on this one. I was sitting down front, thanks to a friend with a broken leg and shooting up into the lights (and some fog as I recall), which gave a really nice background.


Find a friend with a broken leg and sit in the "Lion" section! Btw, since I don't have IS I used a monopod or this photo would not be anywhere near this sharp.

 

[jann1033]

hmm i might still have my old leg brace from when i messed up my knee...i could make hubby wear it just for the occasion

 

[MarkBarbieri]

It's scary to hear the Canon 70-200 F/4 L called "the cheap one."

 

[DueyDooDah]

Nope, no editing on this one. I was sitting down front, thanks to a friend with a broken leg...

You keep doing this to your friends, you'll run outta friends fast. Then no front seats.

 

[Groucho]

It's scary to hear the Canon 70-200 F/4 L called "the cheap one."

This is the kind of thread that I show to my wife and say, "you think I'm bad???" Makes my "big tripod purchase" look pretty piddly in comparison!

 

[jann1033]

well this is the dis board and who is better than disney at making you feel that $10 box of popcorn you bought is worth every penny? ..must become a deeply ingrained philosophy toward all aspects of spending... either that or it's something they put in the air in the camera packages, not sure which