I have the 2.8L Non-IS and it's fantastically sharp all over, but I hardly use it because it's so darn big and white.
OK if you want a long zoom you expect it to be big (and occasionally white) but I find it just too big to cart around so it gets used for portraits on a tripod or the occasional game of rugby.
If I had my time again I would go for the f4 IS - supposedly one of the sharpest zooms ever made and with excellent IS
When it was time for me to decide which lens, the decision was prett simple, actually. Because I am an amateur who occasionally makes a few bucks shooting and I have a wife who doesn't completely get it, I wanted to buy only one lens in this range. Perhaps the 2.8 version is a little softer than the 4.0 versions, and you don't need IS for sports, but IS can be turned off for sports. Perhaps its IS isn't the latest version, but it's definitely better than not having it. I can shoot at 2.8 if I want to or if I need to.
Also, on my 20D I decided when I bought it that when I buy lenses I want the most accurate focusing possible. Best AF with 2.8 lenses or better on a lot of Canon bodies.
"Give me a lens, Vasili, one lens only." 70-200 2.8L IS.
Don't know if this was already mentioned, but 4IS and 2.8IS are "environmentally sealed" (ie handles water better) the 4 is not. Don't know about the 2.8.
The summary is still not updated with the AF-advantage of the f2.8 versions. f2.8 enables maximum precision AF, as mentioned by a couple of other posters above. This is documented in various places in Canon's own publications, and not something some of us here just "feels" ;-)
Eyvind Ness wrote:
The summary is still not updated with the AF-advantage of the f2.8 versions. f2.8 enables maximum precision AF, as mentioned by a couple of other posters above. This is documented in various places in Canon's own publications, and not something some of us here just "feels" ;-)
Ralph, you didn't mention that the IS lenses also have modern digital-friendly design features such as lens coatings, lens element shapes, etc., that help to reduce ghosting and flare. The problems are most obvious when shooting bright subjects in dark backgrounds (e.g. lights at night) but not so obvious during normal daylight shooting. They are also more obvious when using digital cameras than when using film cameras, because the reflections off the sensor assembly are a contributing factor (film is not as shiny and reflects less).
So the IS versions have more than just the addition of IS to help justify the higher cost.
