Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,275

    70 200 f4 to IS or not ?

    Hi guys

    I absolutely love my 70 200 f4, I have got almost all my personal favorites with that lens
    I love the light weight & easy portability, not to forget the superb build quality, the FTM & superfast AF etc
    I would love to have the IS version, all the reviews speak superlatively of it

    I can just about afford it, Is it worth the extra money ?
    flickr
    dcrp shooter's on flickr

    7D,Bge7,Canon 70 200 F4L IS,Canon 17 40 f4L,Canon 100 2.8 Macro,Canon 400 5.6L,580 EX II,Tamron1.4XTC SP AF

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Eastern India
    Posts
    653
    With the 70-200 f/4 L, going by the general rule, one would ideally need a 1/320s ss for a 200mm hand held shot. This may not be a problem in bright sunlight, but under shade and indoors, this high ss would mean a higher ISO or a larger aperture... one would give you noise and the other a shallower DOF
    imagine you had to take the shot at 1/320, f/4, ISO 1600.

    Enter the 70-200 f/4 L IS:

    1) it is supposed to have different & better optics than the 70-200 f/4 and sharper

    2) it's weather sealed

    3) it has the latest generation 4stop IS...this will allow you to hand hold the same shot at 1/20 at 200mm, now you could shoot it at 1/20, f/8, ISO 400 for the same exposure with much lower noise and much larger DOF

    I love the IS on my 70-300IS, even though its only 3stop.
    You first see a photo with your mind, and then capture it with your camera!

    Canon - EOS 50D | BG-E2N | 70-200mm f/4 L IS | 400mm f/5.6 L | Sigma - 18-50mm f/2.8 EX | 30mm f/1.4 EX | 150mm f/2.8 Macro EX | | Misc - 430EX | OC-E3 | EF-12 Ex Tube | Kenko Teleplus 300 Pro 2x TC | FotoFile Backpack AW | Lowepro Nova 3 AW | Tripod | Panasonic FZ5.

    My Flickr

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Viky View Post
    With the 70-200 f/4 L, going by the general rule, one would ideally need a 1/320s ss for a 200mm hand held shot. This may not be a problem in bright sunlight, but under shade and indoors, this high ss would mean a higher ISO or a larger aperture... one would give you noise and the other a shallower DOF
    imagine you had to take the shot at 1/320, f/4, ISO 1600.

    Enter the 70-200 f/4 L IS:

    1) it is supposed to have different & better optics than the 70-200 f/4 and sharper

    2) it's weather sealed

    3) it has the latest generation 4stop IS...this will allow you to hand hold the same shot at 1/20 at 200mm, now you could shoot it at 1/20, f/8, ISO 400 for the same exposure with much lower noise and much larger DOF

    I love the IS on my 70-300IS, even though its only 3stop.
    The 70-200 f/4 IS is definitley on my wish list. I am tempted at times by the 135L though instead - how would that be for my first L glass?!!!
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,313
    Drama - All other things aside, for me personally it is worth the upgrade just for the IS. Having seen some of your work, it looks like you shoot subjects in a lot of conditions where IS would be ideal. Whether or not it is worth the extra money is best answered by you. Given your history, how many shots do you lose over a given period that would be made into keepers with IS? If you are losing a lot of shots due to low shutter speeds, you have your answer. There's nothing wrong with investing in your passions either. The market is good for used non-IS units so you won't be out a huge amount for the upgrade.
    The respect of those you respect is greater than the applause of the multitude.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    If you don't have the 70-200 f4IS then it's the only lens worth considering. If you already have the 70-200 f4 non-IS then I doubt it's worth the upgrade. Personally, I went all IS with my latest lenses. I started out with the following:

    50 f1.8
    18-55 Kit lens
    28-85 f2.8 Tamron
    70-300 Tamron
    17-35 Tamron.

    I have since sold my 50 f1.8 and 70-300 Tamron because they wouldn't focus worth a damn.

    I subsequently bought a 17-85 IS and a 70-300 IS (both Canon). I find the 17-85 IS is the one I use 90% of the time. Despite what all the vocal anti-17-85IS people say, it's a damned fine lens and I have zero problems with CA or distortion. Now I did get horrible CA with the 70-300 Tamron. I have not had it with my 70-300 Canon. My only trouble with the 70-300 is that sometimes the IS throws a wobbly and kicks in on its own. The solution there is simply to power down and power up again.

    I would not now buy a lens without IS - if possible.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kitchener, ONT, Canada
    Posts
    1,225
    When I bought my Canon 70-300, I was considering the 70-200 non-IS. But I decided that I needed the IS for the kind of shooting I do. And I didn't want to spend the extra to get the IS version of the 70-200.

    My experience has been that I made a good choice. The 300 is WAY slower to AF, but I don't use it for fast moving objects so thats no problem. And someday I will upgrade to the 70-200IS.

    You have to decide based on your shooting needs....
    Last edited by GaryS; 11-14-2007 at 07:50 AM. Reason: spelling, like usual.
    My best pics on Flickr

    Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/garysimmons
    Like me on Facebook: facebook.com/GarySimmonsPhotography

    Gear: Canon 60D, Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro, Sigma 50-150 f2.8 EX DC II, Canon 50 f1.8, Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC, Sigma 120-400 DG OS. 1 430EX, 1 430EXII, 1 580EXII, ST-E2, Manfrotto 190XPROB (soon to be replaced by the carbon version)
    Plus filters, wireless triggers and other junk...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    The IS version is of course worth considering. Optically it is even better, and 3-4 stop IS... it is definitely a worthwhile upgrade.

    Go for it, I would say, it is a lens without competition.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Thumbs up No mistake ... this is the lens

    If you have a Canon EOS body ... then don't hesitate. Just buy it and get shooting. Your results should be a lot better than your other lenses, overall.

    Some things go without having to comment further on. This is one of them.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,275
    Thanks every one for so overwhelmingly, supporting for the upgrade
    I am going to trade in my non IS & the Tamron macro
    I dont use the macro much, so that should make the upgrade pretty painless

    A tripod is pretty much useless for my style of shooting, most times
    I need it for the moon shots
    So even though I invested in a good manfrotto, I would love to have the IS
    flickr
    dcrp shooter's on flickr

    7D,Bge7,Canon 70 200 F4L IS,Canon 17 40 f4L,Canon 100 2.8 Macro,Canon 400 5.6L,580 EX II,Tamron1.4XTC SP AF

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Thumbs up IS is where it's at ... let the quivering end

    Yeah ... I like IS on ALL of my lenses ... so I bought a SONY.

    I know just what you mean. LOL
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •