f2.8 or f4???

darich · Jan 22, 2005

I'm about to buy a Canon 20D and a couple of lenses. I already have a Digital Rebel and lenses so that's why it has to be Canon. I'm going to get the Canon 24-70 f2.8L USM lens but undecided about the other one. Canon 70-200 f2.8 or f4?
The f4 is much cheaper but it's f4.
I can afford the f2.8 but not sure if it's worth the extra outlay.

Can anyone helpe me here???
thanks
David

LittleMan · Jan 22, 2005

What will you be photographing most?

Bob_McBob · Jan 22, 2005

Another consideration is the size and weight difference between the two.

Alison · Jan 22, 2005

I have the F2.8 of that lens and I love it. It's by far my favorite. It is a big, bulky lens and if you have the batter grip for the 20D it can get heavy. I don't have personal experience with the f4, but I would highly recommend the 2.8 if you can afford it.

darich · Jan 22, 2005

i photograph a whole range of things....abstract, macro, landscape, rallying.
Size and weight of the lens aren't a huge problem.
I just don't want to get the f4 then decide a few weeks or months down the line i should've gone the extra at the start and got the f2.8.
As for the battery grip....I've had SLRs for years and never needed one....so wont be buying one with the 20D

Digital Matt · Jan 22, 2005

I have the F/4 and it's a great, super sharp lens. There's no difference in quality between it an the 2.8. You should make your choice based on what you photograph most. Are you going to be shooting handheld, in low light? This is very difficult with the f/4. I have done it, but only at iso 800 and 1600. The combination of 2.8 and IS makes the 2.8 much more versatile.

Another consideration. If you buy the f/4, you have to buy the tripod collar seperately and it costs $113. If you buy the 2.8, it comes with. Consider this as well. If you plan to buy any teleconverters, 1.4 or 2x, you will lose 1-2 stops of light, which again makes the 2.8 handy.

I'd say if you have the money, get the 2.8, unless size and weight are an issue for you.

darich · Jan 22, 2005

thanks Matt.
I already own a 2x teleconverter.
As for the collar...i didn't know that was a must on the f4 version.
I generally do shoot handheld and sometimes attend motorsport events where the light can be variable so the faster lens would be important.

It looks like the advice and what I'm thinking is leaning towards the f2.8.

Am i right in saying that the f2.8 can hold that aperture for the entire focal length of the lens???

Digital Matt · Jan 22, 2005

Yes, the 2.8 is a 2.8 max at both ends. You don't need a tripod collar for either, but it's better. I don't want that weight pulling on my lens mount. The f/4 may be lighter than the 2.8, but it's still a heavy hunk of metal and glass. I bought the tripod collar myself.

It sounds like the 2.8 is best for you. If you have the money, you won't regret it. Even though I use a tripod as often as I can, I still wish I would have just splurged and got the 2.8. That extra stop is also nice for shallow dof for portraiture. This lens at 70mm on a 20D is 112mm, a nice portrait lens, and delivers beautiful bokeh.

darich · Jan 22, 2005

Looks like the decision is made....f2.8 it is.
I'll be getting it on holiday in California next month so will post a few pics on my site.....if they're any good!!!
where is the best place to get a tripod collar?
I'll be getting my gear in B&H in NYC but they don't seem to list a collar seperately....or am i mising it?