Which 1 of the 2 game.

[Richard]

Okay first this lens will be used mainly for portraits indoor/outdoor would like to use natural light as much as possible. Sooo....

I hope there is someone who has used both or have both.

Canon 70-200 f/4 IS L
or
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L

Thanks.

 

[ashadiow]

For portraits and still photography, I would take IS. For action sports I would take the 2.8.

 

[Big Mike]

I'd save a bit more and go for the F2.8 L IS...that way you have the best of both worlds and you won't regret not buying it.

 

[FidelCastrovich]

Okay first this lens will be used mainly for portraits indoor/outdoor would like to use natural light as much as possible. Sooo....

I hope there is someone who has used both or have both.

Canon 70-200 f/4 IS L
or
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L

Thanks.

For portraits, there's no reason to not zoom with your legs. Get the 85mm f1.8. Cheaper, sharper, faster, lighter.

 

[JIP]

I would think the 2.8 is going to be the sharper of the 2 lenses as it is fast because of the quality of the glss and not IS. It would be one thing if the IS was a 2.8 but it is not. I want to qualify this statement by saying I am a Nikon user and not familiar with either lens.

 

[usayit]

From what I've seen the 70-200 f/4 IS L is every bit as sharp at wide open... This is why this lens has always been the viable brother of the f2.8 for those of us that need something more compact.

Personally.. for portraits and indoors (not traveling around a lot as it is big and heavy), I"d save up for the 70-200 f2.8 IS L. Wonderful lens... probably one of canon's best zooms.

With that said... I favor primes over any zoom. This is especially when doing posed photos and portraits as you have time to move around and recompose. The image quality should come over the convenience of a zoom.

My favorite bunch to carry: 24L, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8, and 135L. Get the 50mm and 85mm first which is fraction of all the zooms you mentioned. Then decide whether you really need the 24L or the 135L. You can also get the 100mm Macro which also doubles as a great portrait lens albeit a bit slower than the 85mm f1.8.

 

[Trenton Romulox]

I'd say, as some before me have said, save up for the f/2.8 IS. Unless you need a 70-200 ASAP, just save up for the best you can get, and you will have a top of the line lens that will last you a long time, no regrets.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Get the f/2.8. You don't need IS, I don't have it on my 80-200 and I really don't care because the 70-200 VR is way out of price range, and I don't need it.

The f/2.8 will better isolate your subject from the background.

 

[Iron Flatline]

the f/4 is lighter and easier to carry around.

For natural light, you will vastly prefer the f/2.8

IS is good, but not a panacea. You can forego it, or save up for the IS 2.8.

 

[Richard]

Thanks for all the replies!