• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

with or without IS?

scruffy1

TRIBE Member

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Lens Review



Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens Review


Is it worth $900 to get the IS version?
 

Mephisto

TRIBE Member
how much coffee do you drink?

i dunno man, you could get a whole other piece of glass for the price of the is. how many stops does it give you?
 

alexd

Administrator
Staff member
When Canon sponsored me last year I used the IS version of that lens a fair amount and found the image stabilization great however it is camera powered and tends to run down your camera battery faster.

It is also a big heavy lens, but it is nice and sharp.
 

alexd

Administrator
Staff member
I shot this guy with the lens, handheld, early in the morning at a very slow shutter speed. The IS worked so nicely you can see the eyebrow hairs even.

 

Old Yeller

TRIBE Member
IMO, no IS.

I have the 70-200F/2.8 without IS, and i have a 100-400 with IS, i think the IS just slows down the focus too much.

btw, still using that Macro lens a lot?
 

alexd

Administrator
Staff member
i am getting the nikon eqivalent today, trading in a couple of old lenses

 

KiFe

TRIBE Member
I'm pretty sure the 70-200 without IS is only rated at f4.

I've got the 70-200 f4 L and it really kicks some serious ass... I rarely shoot telephoto in low light... so i saved alot of money by going this route... if i was a blazillionaire, natch, i would have gone for the faster lens... as it is, i'm REALLY happy with my f4 and regardless of what you chose between those two, you can't go wrong.

As someone else mentioned however, you can get a whole other lens for the price difference. So ask yourself if you'll be shooting tele in low light.. if not, get yourself something nice with the extra money.


I REALLY desperately wanna get myself a replacement for the kit lens... I've been considering the new EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM... it has everything i wanted, except a larger apeture AND L glass... the IS ought to make up for the slowness, and from what i've read, the clarity is REALLY close to L quality glass.

I'm thinkin' this will make for a stellar walk around lens... too bad no one out there is going to want to buy my kit lens.
 

Old Yeller

TRIBE Member
Pat, the 70-200 can be had in the f/2.8 without IS, i have it.
I also think you can get the f/4 with, or without IS too.

Also, about the EF-S lenses. I wouldn't spend your money on one dude.
They were designed to work on cameras with image sensors smaller than full frame. In fact, they are designed for lenses with a 1.6x conversion factor. This means that if in time you choose to upgrade your Camera, it will likely have a larger image sensor, which will render your new lens useless. In fact, the EF-S lenses don't even mount properly on my 1d with it's 1.3x factor.
I'd seriously suggest saving your coin, buying a normal EF lens, perhaps spending on the L series glass, which will give you the best results for the longest period of time.

We all know lenses are where the money can be spent, i just don't want to see you buy a lens which will work well with your Rebel, but may be useless if you decide to upgrade.
 

alexd

Administrator
Staff member
I just saw the Canon 5D down at Henrys on Saturday. It is like full frame 12 megapixels but with a plastic body for nearly 4 grand. Weird. This is what the forest hill soccer moms will be sporting for Xmas....
 

scruffy1

TRIBE Member
i hate the plastic body on my digital rebel (the old one, not the new XT).

and i think i'm going to go for the non-IS lense and then pick up a second piece of glass and a nice new camera bag while i'm still out here in calgary (and save the 8% sales tax)
 
Top