ohyeah wrote:
The 70-200 f/4L is lighter, yes. But better IQ than the f/2.8? I\'ve had both lenses, and have not found this to be true. Comparing both lenses wide open maybe, but the f/2.8L stopped down to f/4 and smaller is as good or better than the f/4L at any aperture. Having that extra stop is in so many ways better that the \"only\" way I\'d prefer the f/4L is if weight was the deciding factor, period.
Enjoy!!
Are you talking about the IS version? The f4L IS is consistently rated the best of the Canon 70-200\'s. In many cases, I am sure the difference will not matter, since the artistic merits of the shot should carry it (vs. the largely technical concern of supreme sharpness), but even so, the f4L IS is possibly the best Canon zoom lens out there, and is certainly capable of beating up on its 70-200 f2.8 IS sibling a little bit, especially at 200mm.
I agree that it is great to have the extra stop, but I am not sure a \"newbie\", so to speak, will appreciate the virtues of the extra stop when weighed against the, ah, weight of the 2.8. The f4L IS makes a great (high end) starter telephoto zoom, IMO. The 2.8...maybe, maybe not.
