Canon 70-200 F4 L IS or non IS? (1 Viewer)

Eric Samonte · Feb 15, 2011

I have decided I needed a longer reach and with much research, have decided on the F4L non IS. Then my wife goes, "Why get that when u can get the IS version?" Mind u, she doesn't even know what IS is but she says that from what I was telling her, the extra money seems worth it.
So, my question is... it is really worth double the money? Some would say go for the 2.8 but I think the weight will turn me off, eventually me not using it as much. Besides, I can up my ISO if ever I need to use it indoors or in low light.

Sam Posten · Feb 15, 2011

I rented the is version and loved it, if you can afford it and will use it I say go for it...

ManW_TheUncool · Feb 15, 2011

Originally Posted by Eric Samonte

Ok, not exactly always true, but if you plan to shoot in low light a lot (w/out strobes), then you can use *ALL* the light and ISO sensitivity you can muster. Of course, as you open up the lens, you will also have to deal w/ shallow DoF, which can become an issue, though it probably won't be too shallow most times at f/2.8, if you're using a cropped body. If anything, you might find that f/4 is not shallow enough for many cases (whether there's enough light or not).

But yeah, the weight can become an issue, especially if you're already sensitive to that. I haven't been lugging my Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 in a long time either since adding the Nikon 70-300 VR, but then again, my old Sigma didn't come w/ IS and didn't cost me nearly as much as the current going rate for the Nikon/Canon 70/80-200 f/2.8 IS (nor non-IS) either. Plus I can always opt to bring my (optically better) Nikon 180 f/2.8 instead, if I think I need f/2.8 at the long end -- that combined w/ the 70-300 VR probably only weigh a little more than the Sigma alone although the combo requires more bag space to lug...

_Man_

Patrick Sun · Feb 16, 2011

I have the IS version of the Canon 70-200 F/4 because at that focal length, it's best to have something counteracting camera shake, and get more light at lower shutter speeds when possible.

Eric Samonte · Feb 16, 2011

Thanks for the reply guys. I guess if I could swing it, I'd better get the one with IS. Yipee! Now the hunt begins!

Scott Merryfield · Feb 17, 2011

The IS version also has updated elements, so the lens is sharper than the non-IS version. This was probably Canon's best zoom lens until the recently revised 70-200mm f/2.8 IS MKII.

I own the 70-200 f/4 IS, and it is a terrific lens. It has great image quality and lightening fast auto focusing. If you can afford it, I would highly recommend it. This lens is small and light enough to take when traveling, too. It will take a 1.4x teleconverter with very little degradation in image quality or auto focus speed or accuracy, if you need extra reach, too.

Eric Samonte · Mar 2, 2011

Got the thing and frankly I thought it'd be bigger and heavier. I guess its a welcomed surprise for me!

Haven't really tested it out but I noticed that the IS "whir" on every shot and it is quite noticeable? Is this the norm?

Sam Posten · Mar 2, 2011

Yes it is. Canon IS is a lot louder than Nikon VR. You may even hear a 'knocking' effect. This is normal.

Scott Merryfield · Mar 3, 2011

Originally Posted by Eric Samonte

Got the thing and frankly I thought it'd be bigger and heavier. I guess its a welcomed surprise for me!

Haven't really tested it out but I noticed that the IS "whir" on every shot and it is quite noticeable? Is this the norm?

Yes, the IS mechanism does make a noise on most Canon lenses. The loudness will vary, depending on which lens model you have.

The smaller size and weight, compared to the f/2.8 version, is one of the reasons I love this lens (along with the great optics and super-quick auto focusing, of course). It's great for a general purpose telephoto when traveling. I also own the larger, heavier 100-400L, but I only take that lens when I know I'll need the extra reach.

Eric Samonte · Mar 3, 2011

Thanks for the info. Guess I just have to get used to it.

Just an FYI, I got a new one from OneCall, 12 months to pay. For a little over $100 a month, I get to own and enjoy a "white" Canon lens! And yes, my wife approved of it...

javig999 · Mar 11, 2011

Congrats on the new glass! I am think this will be my final lens to round out my lineup. How is the f4 working out for you? Do you find yourself cranking up the ISO for indoor shots?

Scott Merryfield · Mar 12, 2011

Originally Posted by javig999

Congrats on the new glass! I am think this will be my final lens to round out my lineup. How is the f4 working out for you? Do you find yourself cranking up the ISO for indoor shots?

This really isn't an indoor lens. However, if your camera body has decent high ISO performance, then you can get decent results.

The photos below were taken with my 7D and 70-200 f/4 IS at f/4 and ISO 6400.

Eric Samonte · Mar 12, 2011

So far so good. As Scott says, u can get good results with the ISO high up there. Been trying to use it with a flash but it seems that there is a definite learning curve to go that route as I've been getting so so results.

Hate to say this but the white color seem to attract people to "pose" for shots. I like taking candid shots more than posed ones. They also think I know what I'm doing.......good for me I guess...

Patrick Sun · Mar 14, 2011

Well, they do make some neoprene covers for those long lenses to camouflage the cream white-ness of their exteriors...

http://www.lenscoat.com/

javig999 · Mar 14, 2011

Those shots look great...trying to sell a sub to fund this lens!

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

Canon 70-200 F4 L IS or non IS? (1 Viewer)

Screenwriter

His Own Fool

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Auditioning

Screenwriter

Auditioning

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Forum statistics