EF 70-200mm F/2.8 (IS or no IS)

Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by prodigy2k7, Jun 23, 2008.

  1. prodigy2k7

    prodigy2k7 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    1,665
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    California, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    So, it does have the handy feature of being faster than the F/4, so what do you prefer and why? F/2.8 allowed faster shutter speeds to be used, and therefore maybe no camera shake so maybe IS is not always needed.
    Is it worth it for the extra money to have both F/2.8 and IS?

    What are your thoughts?
     
  2. astrostu

    astrostu Guest

    Everything depends on your usage. The short answer is: "Yes." Better to be prepared and not need all the equipment than not have the equipment and miss a shot.
     
  3. Village Idiot

    Village Idiot No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,274
    Likes Received:
    406
    Location:
    Shepherdsturd, WV / Almost, MD
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I took a photo with my 2.8 IS at 70mm with a shutter speed of 1/10. There was minimal blur due to camera shake. Try doing that without IS on and it'll be all over the place unless you're using a stabilizer of some sort.
     
  4. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I have used a 70-200 f/2.8 Sigma and absolutely loved it. Recently I stepped up to a 70-200 f/2.8L IS by Canon and love that too.

    Like Village Idiot said, the IS certainly helps when shooting at telephoto lengths. I took a few shots at 200mm and 1/15 to 1/25 second, and they all turned out acceptable (no subject movement of course). It's stunning how much IS helps at the telephoto lengths.

    If you aren't sure if you have the budget room, get the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 used. Great lens, sharp, fast AF, etc. It's some of the best bang for the buck and a great intro into the 70-200mm range. If you get a used copy, you can always sell it later without it depreciating much. However, if you can splurge - IS is pretty nifty!

    Side note -
    I'd totally get a f/2.8 non-IS over a f/4 IS, but that's just me & I do sports.
     
  5. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,821
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The way I look at this choice...is that if you compromise and don't get the F2.8 IS, there will come a time (probably many) when you will wish that you had bought that lens. You may even find yourself upgrading to it.

    That's why I'm waiting until I can afford it, rather than buying a cheaper one and compromising.
     
  6. sultan

    sultan TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Get the 2.8 IS if at all possible (wait and save money).

    The IS is well worth it, realistically offering a 2 stop advantage (3 are claimed, I think). Thus, a f/4 IS will perform as well as a f/2 non-IS

    UPDATE - Yes, IS will not help with subject motion. It only stops shake. I personally don't think about subject motion much because I always shoot sationaly subjects. Even the birds I shoot are practically stationary.
     
  7. |)\/8

    |)\/8 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    335
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Duluth, Ga.
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    If you can afford the "IS" version, get it, you won't be sorry.
     
  8. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,821
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    A couple members hit on it...but it does really depend on what you shoot. IS is a fantastic tool for a lot of things...but it won't do anything to help freeze a moving subject....because you are still using longer shutter speeds. That being said, it's probably still better to have it than not.

    Now, every new camera seems to be better at controlling noise at high ISO settings...so you could argue that if you have a great camera that shoots clean at ISO 1600, then you could gain back those shutter speeds by increasing the ISO and choose the F4 over the F2.8.

    Then there is still the DOF difference to consider. You can get a shallower DOF with F2.8 than F4.
     
  9. RyanLilly

    RyanLilly No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,478
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri, USofA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Well You could argue that, but the faster glass I get, and the cleaner high iso gets, I find darker and more poorly light places to shoot, I won't be satisfied until I can shoot in a cave.
     
  10. sabbath999

    sabbath999 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Missouri
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I have the VR (Nikon) version... and while I can honestly say I like the image stabilization, I am not sure I would buy it again over the non-VR (which is like IS) due to the massive price difference between the 70-200 2.8 and the 80-200 2.8 (non-vr).
     
  11. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,821
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Amen!
     

Share This Page