Printable View
I am considering the Canon 70-200 f4 mainly for pet photography and for portraits etc. Right noe it is much easier for me to get the non IS version. I'm just wondering, how much better the IS version really is. How critcal will IS be when taking pet portraits and occasionally action shots from fairly close range? Do you think the non IS version will be sufficient or should I wait until I can get the IS version?
Dave Brown
Dave- I have the IS version and it is amazing. That lens incorporates the 4th generation Canon IS technology which they say can give you the equivalent of 4 shutter speed stops. This may be optimistic but I can tell you it works extremely well. In my opinion, any help you can get on the camera-shake front is welcome but whether it's worth the hefty price premium of the IS over the non-IS version is mootable. If subjects are static and you are working mostly from a tripod I would not bother with the IS version but if you also want to use on wildlife or with the 1.4 or 2x tc I would go IS.
I don't know anything about the non-IS version, but I sure do love the IS version.
I have the non IS version and is very sharp. I've used this lens even at 1/60 sec with sharp images.
Good luck!
I used to have the f/2.8, then I sold that and went to the f/4 and used it for over a year, but just sold it to go to the IS version (about three weeks ago). I loved the light weight and compact size of the f/4, and the images seemed sharper than those from my old f/2.8 (but barely), but the IS one is CRAZY sharp. And I love having the IS when I'm fully racked out to 200mm, but it's certainly not as important zoomed out at 70. If I were you, I'd buy a used f/4, give it a try for a while, and if you decide you wish you had the IS version, you can always sell it. (I actually sold my f/4 for more than I paid for it on eBay!)
IS rocks big time. I cannot handhold any non-IS lens without thinking that I have the shakes. You did however not mention what shutter speeds you are usually working at. If outdoors in sun, not to worry. Otherwise IS rules.
I had both...The IS is better , sharper. Some people think IS is not as sharp as a non-IS, in this case it is not true. This is the Photozone test on both. http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/19...review?start=1 http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/19...review?start=1 .....Rich
the non IS works like a charm for me http://photosnag.com/img/1858/y08m1110mhmd/2.gif
I had both and loved both but my IS got stuck on and it went back to Canon 3 times, eventually got a refund and bought the 2.8 Non IS which I also love.
My 300 mm F/4 IS also gave out (though I hardly used it) and it has been in for 3 months while Canon investigate the problem.
NO MORE IS for me.
Over here in Aus. reliability is more important as everything takes so much longer to get repaired, I just hope I don't get Parkinsons Disease.
