70-200 F4 Is !!

[rogerg (Roger)]

I was in a Camera House store today and noticed in their line up of white lenses that there is now a 70 - 200 IS !! When I bought mine (at least a couple of years back) there was no IS version for the F4, only for the F2.8 ! Oh I wish I could upgrade for free...

IS ... oh how I wish I had IS (not for astro, but for other stuff)... If there were a "drool" emoticon I'd use it here.

Roger.

[Dennis]

Hi Roger

What does the IS signify?

Cheers

Dennis

[rogerg (Roger)]

Image Stabalisation ... a very valuable tool for nature/macro/landscape/travel photography, not useful for astronomy I'd expect.

I can shoot 1/15th second shots at 400mm with my partners canon 100-400 F4-5.6 L IS, but can only shoot down to about 1/60th at 200mm with my 70-200 F4 L non-IS. It makes a huge difference.

Roger.

[gbeal]

I have the 70-200 f4L non IS, and wouldn't part with it. I toyed with the idea of the f2.8, but at the cost and weight opted for the f4, and have not looked back. For astro use it is amazing, and all I need now is the tripod collar which unfortunately Canon see fit to not include. A wonderful companion lens is the 17-40 f4 L.

[Dennis]

Originally Posted by rogerg

Image Stabalisation ... a very valuable tool for nature/macro/landscape/travel photography, not useful for astronomy I'd expect.

I can shoot 1/15th second shots at 400mm with my partners canon 100-400 F4-5.6 L IS, but can only shoot down to about 1/60th at 200mm with my 70-200 F4 L non-IS. It makes a huge difference.

Roger.

Thanks Roger - that sounds like a very useful piece of technology.

Cheers

Dennis

[rogerg (Roger)]

Originally Posted by gbeal

I have the 70-200 f4L non IS, and wouldn't part with it. I toyed with the idea of the f2.8, but at the cost and weight opted for the f4, and have not looked back. For astro use it is amazing, and all I need now is the tripod collar which unfortunately Canon see fit to not include. A wonderful companion lens is the 17-40 f4 L.

Garry,

I couldn't agree more - I wouldn't buy the F/2.8 because of the size and weight also. But F/4 image stabalised, now there's something I'd buy. The lense is physically the same size as the non-IS, the only down-side is cost it seems.

Roger.

[sejanus (Gavin)]

The non IS versions of both the f/2.8 and f/4 lenses have a bit better sharpness and less CA.