CANON LENS 70-200mm series?

Question

Is there really MUCH difference between these four?

70-200mm f2.8L IS USM
70-200mm f2.8L USM
70-200mm f4L IS USM
70-200mm f4L USM

I mostly do outdoor portraits of children, family etc, and low key events like anniversary dinners, baptisms, birthdays..... Im looking to buy a GREAT portrait lens but not to spend a fortune!!! I cant decide on the 85mm 1.2 or 85mm 1.8 either.... which one should I buy??

Answer 1

WHAT?! the 28-200mm versus these excellent lenses?! these lenses are 567384563945 centillion times better than the extremly-soft-at-all-focal-lengths 28-200mm. there is quite a difference.



the f/2.8l series is different, and may be too much for you. they are 3 times heavier, and i think it might be overkill for just children, family stuff, but if you want to spend the $1.6K, it is worth it. you may want to rent it, because while 3lbs might sound light to you, if you spend 3 hours with it photographing running children and taking pictures of candles on a cake with a smiling kid in the background, it will be HEAVY. the newer II IS version, which is even more overkill to you maybe, is sharp at all apertures, including f/2.8, (which the original, was soft at a little).



ok if you don't want to read an essay, READ THIS PART:

i recommend the 70-200mm f/4l is usm, because its light (compared to its bigger brother and sister, the f/2.8l series), you do outdoor stuff (which you really don't need f/2.8 for), it has fast AF performance (better than the DC motor of the 70-300mm), and its very sharp. if you have no budget and lost your mind slightly, then spend it all on the f/2.8L IS USM II. but budget wise, and commonsense wise, the 70-200mm f/4l is usm is for you. plus, its weather sealed, unlike the non IS counterparts, so you can take some good pictures on a rainy little league baseball game.



the 85mm is a different story, and if you must, then buy the 85mm f/1.8, because its boatloads cheaper, lighter, and sharper

Answer 2

Either way, I would recommend getting an IS version of those lenses. IS, which stands for image stabalisation, does what it names suggests- it helps stabalises your photo in low light to help lessen camera shake related blur.



As for the choice between the f/4 and f/2.8, it's up to you. Both are very good performs image quality-wise. Personally, I would rather spend less on the f/4 and get an even faster prime lens for very low-light work instead, such as a 50mm f/1.4 lens.



The 70-200mm f/2.8 II IS USM is just an updated version that features a revised optical layout, thus offering better image quality. Unless your a working professional, I doubt it's something that'll you be able to see unless your doing very deliberate tests between the two.



And for the choice between the 85mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.2, it's up to your personal preferences. In terms of image quality, the f/1.2 lens is better, but from f/2.8 and smaller, I doubt you would see a difference. The build quality is also better, but hey, the f/1.2 costs more than 4 times as much as the f/1.8 version. For most people, the f/1.8 is probably the more reasonable choice.



Anyways, hoped this helped. Have fun and good luck!

Answer 3

The 70-200mm f4L IS USM is the best balance between cost, performance and weight.



The stabilized (IS) version is definitely worth it over the non-IS version: hand-holding the stabilized version is much easier, and your photos will be sharper. The f2.8L versions are amazing lenses, especially if you shoot a lot of low-light subjects. On the other hand, from a practical point of view, the f2.8 versions are MUCH heavier than the F4 versions due to the different optics.



Take a look at the great reviews for the 700-200mm f4L IS version:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000I1X3W8?ie=UTF8&tag=mobphohowtoad-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000I1X3W8

Answer 4

Hey,



IS is important, but 1 stop faster allows you to shoot with 1/250 instead of 1/125. That's better!



All are one of the sharpest zooms we've ever seen, of course, with IS II USM being new, it's the best.



You might also find f/2.8 versions to be too heavy, is ~1400g too heavy for you?



Here's a post called 'Buying a Tele Zoom Lens - http://the-digital-photographer.blogspot.com/2010/03/buying-sports-lens.html



Good luck.

Answer 5

The 70mm seems pretty tight for doing the kinds of events you're talking about. My I suggest the lens I use and find rewarding.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/206435-GREY/Canon_6470A006_Zoom_Wide_Angle_Telephoto_EF.html



This lens and my Rebel XS are giving me shots like this

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimsphotostuff/4761423549/sizes/l/

and this - look at his eyes.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimsphotostuff/4615829643/sizes/l/



It's a very sharp, accurate lens and it replaces your portrait and 70-200. Just a thought.



Good luck, Jim