A&P canon 70-200L

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by di3soft, Mar 8, 2007.

  1. di3soft

    di3soft Guest

    probably going to buy one w/o the IS, im still not sure if the 2.8 or 4 500+ differance in price. Help me OTAP.:sadwavey:
     
  2. di3soft

    di3soft Guest

    :wtc: no help
     
  3. you can always buy one, keep it in good condition and upgrade when you save up more money. :dunno:
     
  4. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    f/4 IS, sharpest of the group
     
  5. di3soft

    di3soft Guest

    what do you mean? buy the 4.0 and upgrade later?
     
  6. di3soft

    di3soft Guest

    I dont use the IS on my current lenses so i dont think ill buy one with it, but is it worth it to spend 500-600 more for the 2.8
     
  7. mandarin orange

    mandarin orange OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    9,863
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NOVA
    i bought the f/4L cause i couldn't afford the f/2.8L non-IS. saved up. Sold the f/4L for actually MORE than what I paid for it. Then bought the f/2.8L non-IS. the f/2.8L is nice. I lthink it's worth it. It just depends what you're taking pictures of. I took some portrait photos and I like the bokeh on it. and being f/2.8 i can use it indoors and bump up the ISO and it's fine.
     
  8. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    you shoot only in the sun? with a longer lens you'll need the IS, not to mention its the sharpest of the group regardless. Unless you are doing low light sports or similar, the f/4 IS offers more than the 2.8 non IS in every way, except weight
     

  9. Yeah.

    See manderin oranges post.

    buy something to get you by, keep it in good condition and when you have some extra money and want better results sell you have been using and upgrade. Upgrading will be easy because say you save up $700 and you sell your 70-200 f/4 for $600.. That wll easily get you a used 70-200 f/2.8L IS.
     
  10. Frank N. Beans

    Frank N. Beans I hate BMW's OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Durham, NC
    I'm still saving to buy one of the mentioned lens also. Hearing some of the opinions in this thread is making me second guess what I was aiming for........the 2.8 IS.

    So the f4 is heavier than the 2.8 IS? I picked up a 30D with a 2.8 non-IS last weekend......thats a heavy biznitch. Of course when I had my 300D, my Sigma 70-300 Sigma was a cheesy plastic piece......so I haven't experienced a "real" lens yet I guess. :mamoru:
     
  11. di3soft

    di3soft Guest

    my decision is im going to get the F2.8 going to splurge a little and go balls to the wall
     
  12. Don't second guess the f/2.8 IS it's still the sharpest in the 70-200 arena.

    Viper was saying that the f/4 is the sharpest of the bunch mentioned in the first post ("buy one w/o the IS, im still not sure if the 2.8 or 4")

    yes the f/4 is sharper than the f/2.8 NON-IS
     
  13. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    And the 2.8 NON-IS is sharper than the 2.8IS.

    Its all minor differences, they are all sharp lenses, but IS adds several elements in the optical path which degrades some IQ.
     
  14. link to reference?
     
  15. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    later when I can be bothered, sure.
     
  16. cool :bigthumb:
     
  17. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    fitting in an episode of heros before uni :o
     
  18. the Rosswog

    the Rosswog OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    so the F4 IS is a better choice than 2.8 non IS?
     

  19. never heard of it



    i'm watching this now :o :naughty:
    old but still cute, actually my gf is watching, i watching too kinda :hs:

    [​IMG]
     
  20. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    Heres one, although I am not saying that one is absolute.

    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...mp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=242&Camera=9&LensComp=103

    Move your mouse over for the IS' version of the same image.

    I'll dig more up tonight. But from what I remember the non-is is generally sharper. Seems reasonable that adding non essential lens elements degrades image quality, nothing is 100% efficient. Not to mention more margin for misalignment etc.
     
  21. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    Heroes :doh:

    I go to uni with koreans. Say "duk-cho shibalnom" to her :x:
     
  22. that does make sense, will check out the link in a few
     
  23. Last edited by a moderator: Mar 9, 2007
  24. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    yeah its kinda half half :rofl:
     

Share This Page