Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

Sports Corner Rules
Sports Corner Resource
  

FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm

  
 
captron945
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


There is a pretty big price difference between the two. Although I would like the IS I just can't justify the cost difference shooting for fun and not profit. Just hoping to get some good tight shots. I am using a good monopod. I recently bought a new 70D and mostly like the results with my 85mm 1.8, which I got specificaly for indor volleyball. I would just like to get tighter shots and not have to crop so much. Questions- is the IS that much better than the non IS? Would the non IS give me better results than the 85mm? Would it be a "waste" of money to get the non IS? Thanks for your help.


Nov 21, 2014 at 05:09 PM
Russ Isabella
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


This has been discussed many times and I'm sure you could find a lot of relevant information by searching. Basically, if you are shooting action, not only won't IS help you, but you'll have it 'off' while shooting. Shooting action, your goal is to stop that action, and shutter speed is the one thing that matters most in this regard. IS won't help you stop action, and most believe it slows down AF enough that keeping it off is the best way to go. Will the 70-200 lens give you better results than the 85? Well if your results with the 85 are dependent on shooting faster than f/2.8, the zoom will be a disadvantage. Beyond that, there are good reasons why this particular lens is a part of the kit of most sports photographers. It's a great lens and very versatile. Are you looking at the Mark II or original? The original is no slouch. Final thought: you might find it easier to shoot the 70-200 without a monopod.


Nov 21, 2014 at 05:16 PM
onesickpuppy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


Ditto ++100 on Russ's comments on IS

I had the first IS version of this lens...and now have the second version....and 99% of the
time...you will find the IS turned off.....for everything he stated

Most of my friends that shoot with me think I'm nuts...but my images prove the point

Too many times I never got the shot I wanted....due to waiting on IS to LOCK....learned early
on that if I got the right settings in decent or better light...IS was not my friend.

As Russ stated....Shutter Speed is your friend here....not IS



Nov 22, 2014 at 11:02 PM
Scott Sewell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


Save your money and skip the IS. I have a non-IS 70-200/f2.8 lens and wish I would have had the option of getting a new(er) version of the 400/f2.8 in a non-IS version. About the only time I turn on IS on my 400 is if I'm shooting a full moon. I never use it for sports (including panning).


Nov 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM
ahender
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


Non-IS 70-200/f2.8 is the only one of the three that is parfocal, if that matters.


Nov 23, 2014 at 11:36 AM
pjbuehner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


As mentioned, IS is not so beneficial for shooting sports. However, if you use it for other things, it can be a huge help. Consider all the situations that you will use it for before deciding.

IMHO: The newer 70-200 (2.8 IS II) is in a completely different league than the older model. I rarely used the older one because I was not happy with the IQ and focus accuracy. The new one is nothing short of spectacular in all areas. Perhaps I had a not so good copy of the older one and got a fantastic copy of the new one...who knows.
FWIW I also had the same experience with the 24-70. The new one is amazing while the older one sat in my bag.

Another option if you are looking for a lens to only shoot volleyball is to look at some other prime lenses. The 135 F2 is one of the best bargains for an L lens. Sharp, fast, and good wide open.

Make sure that you can afford to give up a stop of light before getting the 70-200. If you are shooting wide open with the 85...you cut your light in half moving to the zoom

Good luck,
Peter



Nov 26, 2014 at 10:03 AM
timgangloff
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 70-200 2.8L usm vs 2.8L IS usm


Exactly what Peter said. If you love shooting and making nice images the 70 200 2.8 is ii will put a smile on your face. I've had the 85 and 135 but nothing compares to the versatility of the 70 200. While you may not use the IS very often in sports it's nice to have it available. And I say this despite having my lens malfunction and being serviced at canon right now.


Nov 26, 2014 at 12:28 PM





FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.