70-200 f2.8 non-is or 70-200 f4is

[russ1610]

New Christmas present to myself, but which to get, both give or take a few quid the same price. Will be used with 1.4 converter on a number of occasions. Is,, gives me up to 4 stops on the F4 but f2.8 will be better in low light.??? what i really wanted was the 2.8is but it's a lot more.

[Matt_RTH]

What will be the use? I would adore the 70-200 F4IS as a travel lens but not for birding exclusively. I have the 100-400 IS. The 70-200 2.8 would be heavier and my preference for a travel lens would be defeated. That said the 2.8 is fantastic for short depth of field effect. If birding, you might consider looking at the 300mm F4 IS or the 100-400mm IS. 200mm or 280 +/- is pretty short for birding.

[QuantumTiger]

I have the 70-200 f/2.8IS which is a stunning lens - but I don't think I'd be half so happy with it without IS. For me it's getting just that little bit too heavy to hand hold without shake. Pop it on a monopod and it's fine though - so it will depend on your shooting style. To be honest, if the f/4 IS had been available when I bought mine I probably would have gone for that rather than f/2.8

[russ1610]

Mat,
I already have the 100-400L is, and love it. So yes It is mainly for a walk round travel lens. I have Kenko Pro 300 1.4 and 2 x converters already so I could use these on the lens.

[Highcountry]

I have the f4 IS version and really love it. Cannot compare it to the Canon f2.8 but I did have a Nikon f2.8. I can say that for a walk-about travel lens, the f2.8 will become a burden. The f4 IS works brilliantly with my Canon 1.4x and the IS is superb.

[GYRob]

i have to 2.8 isl it get's quite heavey as a walk about.
IS can often get the shot and is well worth having.
Rob.

[JohnJos]

I have the 70-200 f/4 IS and love the lens. It is light so it's not a burden to carry. It does take the Canon 1.4X TC very well. Super lens. I couple this with a 400mm f/5.6 for birding, which works out just fine until I can splurge on a longer lens.

[Jaff]

I've seen reviews that suggest the f2.8 has slightly poorer performance on cropped sensor bodies, at least wide open. It'd work better on full frame bodies. Unless you really think you'd need that extra stop of light I think the 70-200mm f4 IS would be the better between the ones you've listed.

Those are my thoughts anyway.