canon 70-200mm f4 or f2.8 mk2?

J

jonneymendoza

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
6,395
Hi. i currently have 1.8k in british pounds to spend on a new lens and im after a zoom tele lens within the 70-200mm that can compliment my tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens i already own.

i have a canon 400d thats gripped now and i am debating between the f2.8 mk2 and f4 IS of the 70-200mm.

both seem to produce astonishing sharpness and IQ with the mk2 edging it and being the best(for that price it better!) but what puts me off a bit on the mk2 is the weight and possibly the size which a lot have commented on being one of the negatives of the mk2.

Some say you get use to the weight and size and some say because of the weight and size, they leave this awsome lens at home 9/10.

What worries me is that the F4 as everyone knows, is slower then the f2.8. how slow? 1 stop. does 1 stop make a huge difference because from what i have been hearing, the f4 is useless indoors while the f2.8 is excellent indoors? surely if its just one stop, even the f2.8 would struggle indoors right?

About bokeh, f2.8 of course has a better bokeh but by how much? on a crop the bokeh at f4 is not good compared to the same lens attached to a Full frame? if i had a FF camera body then maybe the bokeh argument can be tossed in teh bin as correct me if im wrong, the bokeh on a FF body is pretty similar to bokeh on a crop at f2.8?

Thoughts?

Should i go for the mk2 and make do with the weight and size(i want to take this lens when i go philippines) or should i go for the f4 IS and buy a 85mm f1.8 fast prime just incase i need extra stops of light indoors?

decisons decisions
 
For me I would get the 2.8 IS... the bokeh on the 2.8 was a lot better than on my f/4. I would save more $ on the Mk2 2.8 IS. The 1st Gen 2.8 IS is a great lens too, you could prob find a nice used one.
 
Had... the f/4 IS was lightweight, size wasnt that bad... it was pretty skinny. Now the 2.8 IS is bigger and heavier.. but I can carry that with one hand all day long and it would not be a problem... I love 2.8 at 200mm when shooting models on the beach.... or outdoors. The IS helps with wind and handshake, etc... I love IS technology... but again you cannot get the look/bokeh from the f/4 as you can with the 2.8. Both are very sharp lens optically....
 
Mini First impressions of the 70-200mm f2.8 mk2

i just had a go on it in selfridges store.

to explain the type of lighting the place is, the camera section is in the basement of selfridges and the light inside their is not great.

Its like taking pictures inside your living room with dim low light settings during the night. why is their poor lighting? because the camera section is next to the TV and audio section.

I tested it out on my camera and took a few shots wide open with IS on and my o my the results where fantastic and sharp!

im still at work so when i get home i will post the image online and i wont apply a single PP to it but from the camera previous screen, it looks awsome.

i handheld at 1/15 at around 100-150mm and their was no camera shake evident on the pic!

The focus was super smooth and accurate but to fully test the AF i need to be outside shooting something thats moving.

i couldnt hear it focus!

In terms of weight and feel, it felt great. solid and well constructed. it does weigh a bit and i even hanged my 400d with the lens attached and grip on and hang around my neck and i can say it will definetly strain my neck after maybe 10mins.

a shoulder strap is a must for this lens but overall in terms of weight and feel, i can see it not bothering me much at all. Its hard to make a conclusion on the weight and proper feel without using one for a whole day but initial impressions are positive.

So overall the low light performance blows away my tamron 17-50mm and it certainly weighs and feels like a £1800 item.

It will be bought. no if's or buts. i will get this no doubt and thank you all for all your wonderful posts about this lens.

This will be my first L lens purchase and cant wait!
 
Yeah the 2.8 IS mk2 is one great lens... love it and would not part with it.. the dof is just awesome.. IS helps big time...
 
I am now a proud owner of this lens :)

my first L lens. took me 3 years to get to where i am today!

Started off with the kit lens that came with my canon 400d and then a year later, bought a nifty fifty prime f1.8 lens and then last year i bought my awsome tamron 17-50mm f2.8 along with a 430ex2 and now today my first ever L lens and instead of going cheap saving cash and buying the f4, i decided to go for the full yards and get the best 70-200mm i can get!

Will give this lens a proper test this weekend but all i can say is wow the build quality is sensational.

Next up on the agenda is a new body. :)
 
Congrats on the new lens. I've been eyeing up the Nikon equivalent for a long while.
 
I own the f/4 and I rent the f/2.8 mkII when I need it. I think the big one would overwhelm a 400d body but that's a matter of personal preference. If you're shooting a lot of low light stuff, the f/2.8 will be very handy. If most of your photography is daylight stuff, you'll be satisfied with the f/4.
 
I think you'll be very happy with your purchase for years to come.

I've had mine (Mk I) for almost 10 years now and it's my most used lens. I also have the 4.0. I bought that for my wife thinking it would be easier for her to carry.

The 2.8 can be tiresome at the end of a long day, but I wouldn't leave home without it. If you plan on walking/hiking with it a lot, I can highly recommend an R-Strap, or something along those lines.

Be sure to post some shots of your first weekend with it.

Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top