DSLRUsers.com

Ok I currently have the Canon 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM love it but keep getting told the L series is superior for clarity and the F2.8 a better way to go ... so have been looking at the 70-200 F2.8 and a 1.4 teleconvertor ...

Anyone tried both ? Hoping to use the groups wealth of hands on experience to spend my $$'s to the best advantage .

Rgds Deb T

Well i have the nikkor 70-200 lens, but i can tell you it's fantastic. I have the 2x TC and that works perfectly for almost all situations. If it's a low light situation, i just take off the TC and try and get closer. It's fantastic to be able to shoot at 2.8

I Have the 70-200 L IS 2.8 and 2+TC Its so clear and sharp I just love it with the 2*tc it a 5.6
A great lense
Tony

I've got mates who have both, so I've used them. I then bought the Sigma 70-200/2.8

Deb T - I think you would kick yourself if you did not get the Canon 70~200mm f/2.8L IS version.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... 00is.shtml

At the very end of this review, quote "The decision between the non-IS and the IS version of this lens is a no-brainer. The extra $750 gets you a lens with far greater versatility. It will get you shots that you otherwise will miss. If that's not worth the extra money, I don't know what is.

If you already own the original 70~200mm f/2.8L then the decision to upgrade is a bit tougher. You already know how good this lens is. If you can find someone to give you a good price for your old lens, and feel that adding IS will make sense for your style of shooting, then I believe it's worthwhile.

As for me, once the lens been returned to Canon Canada, (who were kind enough to lend it to me for this location test), I needed to figure how to fit one within my budget. It didn't take me long. A month later I had bought my own.

Conclusion: Recommended without reservation." unquote.

fozzie

Look at buying lenses as a long term investment. You will go through bodies, but lenses should be around for a while.
Build a collection that you won't be wanting to upgrade down the track.

Get the IS. I did.

get the IS version, i was tossing up between th IS and non IS between f2.8 and f4.0, but decided on the F2.8 IS. Got it a month ago. On the outset its a bit heavy but I love the IS.

Cheers
Mak

Within the last 12 months I have owned, in this order, the Canon 70-200 F4 non IS, F2.8 IS then F2.8 non IS.

I rarely used the IS as I mainly photograph kids (portraits), birds and sports which are all moving subjects. I sold it and purchased the non IS version and am as happy as Larry. It is a tad lighter (though not much lighter) than the IS version. It is also, in my experience, much sharper. I have read numerous (50+) reviews re the sharpness of the two 2.8 lens and almost all agree that the non IS version is quite a bit sharper.

However, this is all subjective comment. You may get one particular copy of the IS version which is sharper than a non IS version. Sharpness is not everything in lens decisions. Bokeh, colour, versatility all need to be considered.

Lastly, you will need to consider the weight of the F2.8 lens. If you are using a 40D/5D/400D body, you will most probably need a battery grip to even out the weight of the setup. This makes for a heavy combination. I for one prefer a heavier camera/lens setup, but I am a reasonably beefy bloke.

Either way, with the F4 or F2.8 family of lens, they are amazing pieces of construction, beautifully designed, extremely versatile, and pro quality. I wish you well in your decision making.

Ozi.

Get the IS, can't go wrong.

Thanks Guys appreciate the advice
.. tried the IS out on my 40D body and yes it's a bit heavier but seems to suit the camera weight and balances nicely , I'll take the advice on buying for the long term and go with the IS

so now I will be stalking the postie till it arrives

Have fun - know I will
Deb

Yep can't go wrong with that lens. My favorite lens for portraiture and IS is a great useful feature when the occasion calls for it

Ahh the eternal baffling question.

Great choice and look forward to seeing your photos!

You'll love the lens wide open at 2.8. It's just a dream!

It really depends on what you shoot. If it's a lot of day-time (outdoors etc) then IS is probably not going to help you very much.
If you're shooting in darker conditions, you'll need to be able to maintain a shutter speed of faster than 1/focal length, i.e. 1/200 for 200mm.

If those are the conditions, you will probably need IS.

It's about $800-1000 more for IS... for that price you can get another nice lens like a 135mm f/2L.. the choice is yours.

ozbastion wrote:If you're shooting in darker conditions, you'll need to be able to maintain a shutter speed of faster than 1/focal length, i.e. 1/200 for 200mm.

If those are the conditions, you will probably need IS.

As long as the subject isn't moving much, because IS isn't going to help there either.