70-200 F4L with IS or without?

[2sanstef]

Finally, made up my mind to purchase a 70-200 F4L at last

I borrowed a 70-200 F4L IS last week and was blown away with the image quality, contrast and sharpness were superb however, but one burning issue is how can I justify the additional £400 for the IS is it really worth the money?

I know both lenses get good write ups but I don't want to regret not going for the IS and then losing money upgrading in the future.

Thoughts from users of both lenses would be appreciated

Thanks

[Dave]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

What will you predominantly use the lens for? Are you an habitual tripod/monopod user? Do you currently rely on IS when using other lenses in your bag? Asking yourself these kinds of questions might help you make the decision.

There's nothing worse than thinking you have a shot in the bag only to find out when you get your pics loaded on the computer that they all suffer from camera shake. Especially if you can't recreate the shot...

Personally I'd go IS. This is a lens that will last for years and one that many people find gets heavy use. Then again, it comes down to subject and shooting style...

[Ayrton]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

The IS version didn't exist when I got mine. I have IS on my 24-105 so I do appreciate its merits but for what I shoot I haven't missed it on my longer zoom.

I could never have justified the cost of the IS version even if it had existed at the time I bought, so for me it would have been the non-IS or else non-L!

Like Dave says it depends what you are going to do with it. But I for one am certainly a happy non-IS user.

[DenisV]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

I had the same dilemma. The is version had just came out then and was really expensive (it is even more expensive now that the prices have been lifted due to gbp falling). My solution was to buy The is version from kerso. Happy. Check what he is charging.

[Bob Everick]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

Personally, rather than paying the additional £400 for IS I'd pay the additional £500 and get the f2.8.

Bob

[Woolley]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

I've got the f/4 non-IS which I'm very happy with. I'm of the opinion that if I could have comfortably afforded the IS it would have been useful on a number of occasions. However, as I couldn't comfortably afford it, the difference wasn't worth sacrificing other things for.

[PaulieDC]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

I struggled with that dilemma too when deciding between the 70-200mm/2.8, and I ended up with the non-IS version and have never regretted it. The savings got me a 100mm 2.8 Macro. Then when the 5D Mark II came along and ISO 3200 was very usable, BOOM, there's my extra f-stops I would have gained with IS. The camera body does come into play, because if you have an older Rebel Xi (not sure what numeric model that is over there in the UK), you only get ISO 400 or maybe 800 usable, so you may want IS in that case. For low-light shots of interiors or outdoor things like Christmas lights, IS is huge if you have no available tripod. Sightseeing indoors also. But if your subject is moving it isn't much of a help. Honestly, if IS was only maybe $150USD more it'd be worth it. Here in the States the prices have increased, and the 70-200mm/2.8 is $1279 w/o IS and $1949 with it. I just can't see nearly $700 more for that. If you can afford it, then I guess it doesn't matter!

[EOS_Jim]

Re: 70-200 F4L with IS or without?

Even the 70-200 f2.8 has its limitations. You need reasonably good light to use it 1/200the shutter speeds are required at the long end. IS on the f4L means being able to shoot at significantly slower speeds and maintianing sharp shots (down to about 1/25th and lower)! My 70-200 f2.8L IS is regularly used at 1/60th (ISO 1600) inside a lowly lit church. Even the 2.8 lens would struggle in these conditions.

I appreciate that IS doesn't freeze motion but in my view it's really worth the extra. I used to have the f4L and struggled at times when shooting in lower light.

If you can afford it, the IS lens will be a better option.