f/2.8 or f/4 with IS

[stw69]

Ive got both the 17-55mm f2.8 & 70-200 f2.8. I do find that the focusing on the 70-200 is faster even though both are f2.8. Guess latest technology plays a big role. Hence if u can afford, save for the latest tech. Weight is a concern initially. I do hit the gym quite often and hence thought that this 70-200f2.8 shouldn't be a prob for me until I carry and wear it on my neck. Very, very siong. Nevertheless I bot the sun sniper strap recently and the prob is resolved. It can hang on to my body the whole day and I dont feel any strain at all. The other 2 popular alt will be Luma Loop and Black Rapid. Many gd comments also. Hope this info helps.

 

[eoser]

I prefer bringing my F4 is around. I use to own a F2.8, but quite heavier. Despite its F2.8, it is seldom packed into my camera bag. F4 IS is great for travel and general use. Outdoors F4 IS is usually good enough. Indoors if the light is limited, I will just take out my prime lenses.

 

[ranma-cs]

If you shoot indoors quite a lot, 70-200 2.8 IS II is definitely the way go if you can afford it.
Otherwise 70-200 f4L is just as good and lighter, though you might find yourself shooting at iso 1600 or 3200 quite frequently.

If you are thinking of dim lighting conditions, neither will cut it due to their long focal length.

 

[zarray]

if you shoot indoors..defnitely the F2.8 IS.

An even better and lighter option would be to go all primes. 85mm f1.8 and 135 f2

 

[aloks]

Hi
2.8 is always better .
Thanks
Alok

 

[leowyien]

Hey guess i did not make it clearer. I was referring to the 24-70 and the 24-105mm

 

[Kenneth67C]

Hey guess i did not make it clearer. I was referring to the 24-70 and the 24-105mm

If you combine your original question: "Which lens can help to remove shutter shake?" and refer to these 2 lenses, IMO heavy lenses are generally better, but you must be able to take the weight. If you are not used to carrying this amount of weight and handholding, then stick with the F4 with IS.

If I were to do it again, I'd just get primes and forget the zoom. This range has the best primes which will best either zoom.

 

[ranma-cs]

24-70L.

but for low light at this range, i use primes.

 

[oysterlee]

Would rather IS then larger aperture

 

[Goldenstars08]

If you need faster shuttle speed take the F/2.8.
If the object is not moving but you need to hand held in a lower shuttle speed get the F4 IS.
Hope this help...

 

[Ren_Hao]

F2.8 for me. The more light I can get, the better

 

[neech7]

the f2.8 IS II is quite a beast to lug around(together with my gripped 7D) for a day of street shooting vs the 760g f4 IS version.

Well then I suggest you lose the grip and just carry that extra battery in your pocket.

 

[tecnica]

Well then I suggest you lose the grip and just carry that extra battery in your pocket.

without the grip, the camera will be front heavy, ergonomics will be skewed.

 

[neech7]

without the grip, the camera will be front heavy, ergonomics will be skewed.

Depends on how you hold your gear, I guess. I also have the 70-200 2.8 II and an ungripped 7D. I have the lens' mount ring removed and I support the weight of the setup mostly with my left hand, grabbing the lens near where the mount ring would be. I find it quite well balanced this way. Then again, you may be more comfortable holding your gear another way.

 

[kaylan2000]

There had been many and many threads on 24-70 vs 24-105

Both are equally good and used for slightly different purposes. Use the one that suits your specific requirements.

 

[v0857]

If you combine your original question: "Which lens can help to remove shutter shake?" and refer to these 2 lenses, IMO heavy lenses are generally better, but you must be able to take the weight. If you are not used to carrying this amount of weight and handholding, then stick with the F4 with IS.

If I were to do it again, I'd just get primes and forget the zoom. This range has the best primes which will best either zoom.

hi, saw your gear list, could you tell me which prime you consider best from your experience? Sorry TS for OT a bit.

 

[bayusuputra]

hhmm.. f/2.8 and f/4.. only 1-stop different.. but IS can get up to 3-stops difference.. :think: hhmm.. considering you don't have issue with $$$ and weight.. hhmm.. it's quite hard to guess which one can offer better "protection" against camera shake.. hhmm.. so hard.. oh, forget, good hand-holding techniques can offer 2-stops difference.. hhmm.. even harder to think now.. and can you immediately tell whether a photo is taken by the f/2.8 non-IS and f/4 IS? hhmm.. :bsmilie:

joking, joking..:lovegrin:

 

[gundamseed84]

Well f/4 with IS can help to stabilise at lower shutter speed to achieve sharp photos (of static objects). However IS cannot help to bring up the shutter speed (without increase in ISO) to freeze a motion while f2.8 may be able to.

E.g. if I am using my 500D whereby ISO 800 is like the limit in terms of noise, I would prefer f2.8 while still using ISO 800 rather than f4 and IS with ISO 1600 since noise would degrade the IQ.

Also f2.8 allows more room to play with dof. So if freezing motion under low light or dof is impt to you I think f2.8 might be a better choice. Otherwise f4/IS would be helpful in terms of weight and stability of your shots.

 

[blurshot]

Suggest you rent both F4 and F2.8 lens and go out shoot for a few days and you can decide on your own or you prefer to tabulate the votes cast in this thread?

 

[Shen siung]

it's a classic case of how much you wanna compromise. not sure if you are talking about the 70-200 series or 24-70L vs 24-105L.

basing on the 70-200, i feel that at this range IS is important to have, especially when you go all the way to the tele end.

of cause' i can KIV the f2.8 IS II version but the hard truth is, i am a hobby shooter and am not prepare to plonk down such big money just yet.

weight issue is another concern. at just 10g shy of 1.5kg, the f2.8 IS II is quite a beast to lug around(together with my gripped 7D) for a day of street shooting vs the 760g f4 IS version.

yes, my heart longs for the brighter f2.8 but my logical real world consideration points to the f4 IS version instead.

coupled with the fact that i have shot a Tamron 70-300 VC USD in a circus before and found the results to be satisfactory, i feel that f4 is not really that slow though still 1 stop short of f2.8.

so there you have it, the analysis of my needs and wants.

Well said. So to TS, just weigh the pro and cons. If don't mind the money and weight, go 2.8 IS. If not, f4 IS is good