Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
CANON EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Lens vs EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM comparison?
Hi all I'm planning to buy the CANON EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM to use with the EOS 500D possibly the 550D for some studio and outdoor photoshoots with models. I have also seen that its cousin lens the F2.8 L is a viable option too. My question is which is better for both my intended purpouses? Image quality is my overall concern rather than the price but please feel free to add what you may think is good and not so good in regards to this question and the gear.
This question is targetted to professionals or people who know alot about this equipment. Any help on the matter would be greatly appreciated to an aspiring fellow photographer. Thanks in advance again to those who can help me.
5 Answers
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
Hey,
These are both optically great lenses. I have shot with the f/2.8 many times, especially when shooting indoor sports.
They are one of the best Canon zooms, if not the best. The extra 1 f-stop difference will allow you to use one stop faster shutter speed (1/500 instead of 1/250) and will result in a better blurred background with lovely bokeh. Outdoor, you won't take this lens off; it's just so damn good.
- Sound LabsLv 71 decade ago
If you are a photographer you should know the answer to this. Both are L glass, both have the same focal length both are optically stable. There are two advantages to the 2.8. The first is the extra stop of light with the larger aperture, the second, the additional pop you are going to get with the extra blur of the background when you shoot wide open with the 2.8.
That's it. As far as image quality goes, good luck trying to spot the difference. I don't shoot Canon, I'm a Sony Alpha shooter. What bothers me is that you say you want to use either lens for studio work and for work with models outdoors, why do I know this about these two lenses, and you don't?
I know this is going to sound harsh but it's time to learn more about the gear used in photography. Also, aren't the two Canon bodies you listed entry level dSLRs? Why buy that and then fork over tons of dough for L glass? No sense in buying a cheap rental car and then slapping five thousand dollar rims on it.
- 1 decade ago
If you can afford it, always go with the lens with the lowest F-stop. You'll be able to manipulate the depth of field (and bokeh) a little better and you'll have more versatility shooting at night without a flash.
Assuming that the lenses are the same every other way F2.8 is a better lens.
Hope this helps
Best Wishes
- Anonymous5 years ago
The EF 70-200mm f/4L was my first leap into the "L" series. It's a wonderful lens! I now have a 2.8 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, but i wish I'd kept the EF 70-200mm f/4L too! It was a lot lighter. Don't get the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS, I know all that crap they say about IS, but really the consistant f/4 is better! imho!
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
You're spending that much money, you might as well spend the extra $500 and get the F2.8. I have it and use it in conjunction with a 5D mk II. This is a very good combination for low light. If you can afford it, I'd go with a 5D or a 7D instead of the 500 or 550.
