Hi all,
I'm sure this has been discussed to death but I'm about to pull the trigger on this purchase. I'm leaning towards the F4 IS version for these reasons:
-Much lighter so it is easier to carry/manage for a full day
-Concerned about how to be steady without the IS considering the 2.8 version is much heavier
One thing in favor of the F2.8 is that the tripod ring is included. Do you think this is necessary in the F4 version?
I know it depends on what I am shooting. I'm not planning on shooting a lot of low light, but on my 40D will the AF perform better with the F2.8 since the center AF sensor is better with F2.8 lenses?
-Rich
Rich,
I wouldn't worry about the tripod ring on the F4. I have one (bought a chinese version off of ebay) and have never used it, despite doing alot of night photography. Any decent tripod head can support the body with the lens attached. I love my F4. The 2.8 would have come in handy a few times, but for the weight penalty I haven't regretted going w/ the F4 once. I use primes when I really need low light performance. Hope that helps.
Yes it has been done to death, but everyone's circumstances are different.
I would say you're actually MORE likely to be able to keep it steady without IS because the f/2.8 version will give you DOUBLE the shutter speed wide open, in marginal light this can make a big difference, plus the extra weight can actually help keep momentum down as it takes more force (torque?) to get the rig moving in the first place.
I've never regretted not buying the tripod ring for my f/4 IS, and the cost is utterly ridiculous, it's about 2/3 of the difference between the f/4 and f/2.8 IS anyway, so if I wanted to splurge that kind of money on the tripod ring I'd just pay the difference and buy the f/2.8. FWIW the lens will weight roughly the same as the body (c.750 grams) so you shouldn't have any problems without a tripod mount, especially if you have battery grip and/or flash mounted on the body.
The extra sensitivity of the centre AF point does only activate on f/2.8 or quicker lenses, but I've shot my f/4 IS at wedding receptions on the 40D wide open at ISO3200 in the sort of light where you're lucky to get 1/20th, I assure you that in that light, the AF is the least of your problems, the 40D will still focus quickly and accurately in that kind of light. The difference between f/2.8 lenses and slower ones on my 30D is marked, and if you had one of those I'd say f/2.8 without a doubt, but on my 40D it's pretty negligable.
As always YMMV but that's my experience with 40D + 70-200 f/4 IS.
first ask yourself what you want to shoot. The IS on the F4 model is brilliant but wont help gain extra speed for moveing subjects, so if what you shoot moves then its the 2.8 for you.
As for handholding its not too bad and actualy the extra bulk can give you a better balance, I Have a 80-200 L and find it easier to handhold than my 70-300 IS (with the IS off) but after a while you do know that you have a heavy lens in your hands.
You can always use a monopod to give extra stabilty.
The F4 does not really need a tripod ring as its much lighter and shorter than the 2.8 but you can purchase one if needed, but then if you bought it for the IS then its not going to spend much time on a pod anyway.
The bottom line is that there's no substitute for faster aperture, if you need it to freeze motion. Whether or not you need that ability depends entirely on what you shoot. Sports, action etc? Get the 2.8... Landscape, stills etc? Get the f4. Both/all of the above? Get the 2.8IS! These are different tools each better suited to their particular strengths. Know your subject(s) and you'll have your answer.
Also, the tripod ring isn't necessary for the f4, it will balance well on a lens mount assuming you've got a decent head on your tripod.
Thanks for all the responses. I actually rented both the F4 IS and F2.8 IS and the 2.8 was the best lens I ever used. It was phenomenal beyond words. I shot an entire school play in the dark from the 20th row and all the pics exposed fine - without a flash! I have the money for either, but I'm afraid I'll get tired of carrying around the brick (2.8 version).
Extra stop of light or extra stop of IS.
If you aren't intending on doing any kind of action photography, then I'd stick with the 70-200 f4 IS. It's smaller and doesn't weigh nearly as much as the f2.8 version.
Tripod collar is certainly optional on the f4 IS. I wouldn't worry about it.
