24-70 or 24-70ii or 70-200 f2.8 or 70-00ii f2.8?

[enotoarts]

Ok, so I am a bit confused. I have an event coming up and I want to get the 24-70mm canon lens but I also need a 70-200. The 24-70 is currently more important but here's my problem. I have a budget of $2500....

Should I:
1. wait for the new lens to be released and fork out the big bucks and buy the new 24-70 II and hire the 70-200 f2.8 II for the day or
2. buy the older original 24-70 and the older 70-200 f2.8 (no IS-not a huge issue)

Does anyone have experience with both the 70-200 f2.8 IS & non IS versions? or the f4 versions? is there a huge difference? I'll still wait to see some reviews on the new 24-70 once it is released but just wanting some opinions.

[patrickv]

I recommend the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. I am extremely impressed and pleased with it: it's worth a lot less, has superb optical quality, and has stabilization as a bonus. It has very good build quality, is slightly lighter than the Canon, ...

I wouldn't say the same about the 70-200 alternatives where Canon is very clearly superior. The 70-200 f/4 series are excellent. They just have one less stop of light, which can be a problem for low light or action... f/4 will have a lot of trouble focusing in low light.

[Tjfrnds]

Do you just want these lenses specifically for this event? If so, you could always hire both, then that would give you a feel for them.
I have a 70-200 2.8IS L (mark 1) and it's fantastic, though I haven't tried the non-is version so I can't compare. There's a few threads on here though discussing the 70-200 IS vs non-IS if you do a search.

Another option could be the Tamron 24-70 which has recently been released. It's gotten some pretty good reviews.
Having a quick look, digital camera warehouse = Tamron 24-70= $1249
DWI= Canon 70-200 2.8 L (non-IS)= $1248, canon 70-200 4 L IS = $1117

Either of those options would fit your budget

[etherial]

I'm not sure I can make suggestions for what you do for your event, only you know what is important and what your bigger picture priorities are for lens purchases. But regarding your question on the 70-200 range, I can offer some experience.

I had the 70-200/4 version which is the cheapest of the range (around $700 grey) and it was a simply brilliant lens, especially for the money. It is light, focuses fast and was very very sharp. I actually regret selling it now.

I upgraded to the 70-200/2.8 IS (version 1) and have found this to be a pretty good lens, probably on a par with the f4 in most areas, but maybe not quite as sharp (splitting hairs here though). I've read that the V2 is a better lens which would be expected given it is 10 or so years newer design.

The 70-200/2.8 non IS is the oldest in the range and I've read it is probably the worst of them too. So I would say thumbs up for either of the f4 versions, and if you are going for the 2.8 you are best going for the IS version. V2 would be good, but you might pick up the V1 cheaper and still have a very good lens.

Hope that helps

[enotoarts]

@etherial so you would recommend the 70-200/4? The lightweight of it is a huge bonus and is definately a reason for me wanting to purchase. Did you have any negatives for it or what was your reason for wanting to sell it?

[etherial]

Highly recommend the 70-200/4 based on my usage of it. I found it to be a great lens. I didn't use it in VERY low light though. The reason for my upgrade was I needed the extra stop the 2.8 gives for shooting indoor sports where I needed to freeze motion (where IS isn't going to help). The other big bonus with the f4 is that it is cheap and there is a good market for them. I bought mine second hand from an AP member and sold it some time later for the same price.

[patrickv]

I have used the 70-200 2.8 version 2 with IS to shoot some action. It did not disappoint, the results are spectacular. I did have a bit of a sore left hand from hand holding it after though ...

[William W]

Does anyone have experience with both the 70-200f2.8 IS & non IS versions? or the f4 versions? is there a huge difference?

Yes I have used all five.

Besides the obvious difference of having IS available or not and the extra stop of lens speed, there is not real world difference btween the five lenses: comparing Image Quality between the five lenses once stopped down a little bit results in all lenses being “exceptional” throughout their zoom range.

The EF70 to 200F/2.8L IS USM MkII is the superior of the fastest lenses wide open, followed by the EF70 to 200F/2.8L USM, then the EF70 to 200F/2.8L IS USM. The same applies to all those lenses used with both Canon EF MkII Tele-extenders. The IS MkII lens with the MkIII EF Tele-extenders being superior in all accounts.

Of the F/4 variants, the IS version is superior wide open. And this is also so when combined with the x1.4EF MkII Tele-extender.

It is moot to engage in comparison of IQ between the F/4 and F/2.8 variants: as either one requires the extra stop of lens speed or one does not require that extra lens speed. It is really as simple as that.


What specifically do you want to know about the lenses?
What specifically is the job you have to cover?
Will you be using this lens in the future? If yes - for what work, generally?
What Body(ies) are you using?



WW