|
I had the F/4 non IS, it was fantastic..
In sharpness, its been said on many sites that the order is:
70-200 F/4L
70-200 F/2.8L
70-200 F/4L IS
70-200 F/2.8L IS
I now have a 200 F/2.8L mkII prime, as I found I didn't really use the shorter end of the zoom (and for what its worth, I dont like zooms anyway..) The 200 F/2.8 prime is noticeably sharper than the zooms, so if you think you can get away without the flexibility, then the prime is perhaps a better option.
Do remember, holding a heavy zoom lense is a lot different holding a heavy wide angle all day long... I thought as you did before I got into long focal lenght photography.. after having owned quite a few heavy wide angle lenses, weighing in at up to 1kg... The 70-200 F/2.8L is 1.38kgs, but its long... this equates to a very different dispersion of weight, and it can get a little uncomfortable at times.. That said, I happily walk around with a 300 f/2.8 on a regular basis... It all depends on what you're used to carrying...
I say read every review online you can find, figure out what you require..
My personal thoughts.. Go the F/4L.. IS is not that bigger deal really, and provided you dont intend to use it indoors or in really low light conditions, you wont need IS or the heavier F/2.8..
My 2c
|