Previous versions of Chris Beaumont's message #6394203 « 70-200mm F4 IS or F2 non IS »
Chris Beaumont Offline [X]
Re: 70-200mm F4 IS or F2 non IS
Hi Rich,
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, but on my 40D it\'s pretty negligable.
As always YMMV but that\'s my experience with 40D + 70-200 f/4 IS.
Chris
Nov 18, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Previous versions of Chris Beaumont's message #6394203 « 70-200mm F4 IS or F2 non IS »
