70-200mm f4 usm L or 70-200mm f4 IS usm L?

[yc2005]

Who said I'll be using speed 1/20 ?
I never gambling using that speed on tele, for sure :bsmilie:
(unless for panning, but that's a different case)

Exactly.

At 200mm without IS you cant have speeds like 1/20 and have decent keepers. With IS, you can afford to have lower ISO. Obviously IS is not everything, but it can be a lifesaver when you need it.

 

[clloydjoy23]

thanks guys! i appreciate.:thumbsup:

 

[guitarboutique]

it's not only the IS, optically the IS version is different as well, contains a Fluorite element.

 

[Silas]

I'm also considering the lens and will probably want to try both lens before making my decision. Can anybody advise where i can rent and how does the rental work?

How much does it roughly cost and what items like identification do i need for registration?

The site i found rents it for around $40 a day. Is this a reasonable rate?

 

[kinetic82]

How about comparing the 70-200 F4 IS USM with the 70-200 F2.8 USM?
Their prices are close, so which one would be more value for money?

Paiseh if i OT..

 

[chicklit]

I read somewhere, Canon 70-200 f.4 L IS is the sharpest lens produced by Canon...

 

[tongki]

I read somewhere, Canon 70-200 f.4 L IS is the sharpest lens produced by Canon...

Not anymore until Canon released EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L II :bsmilie:

I mean compare to the same 70-200mm range,
I think the sharpest lens still EF 200mm f/2.0 and then follow by EF 300mm f/2.8

How about comparing the 70-200 F4 IS USM with the 70-200 F2.8 USM?
Their prices are close, so which one would be more value for money?

Paiseh if i OT..

If that's the choice, I will prefer 70-200mm f/2.8 as wide open gets more benefit rather than IS, you can't freeze moving subject with IS, right ? :bsmilie: