canon 70-200 f4 non is

[Anonymous]

#36167

I used to own the IS version of this lens

Will I miss the IS. should I decide on going the non is route? I know al depends on what I photograph. my len was stolen a week ago, used to be my walk around lens

at suggestions / help appreciated

Thanks
Phil

[SimonDP]

#297933

On a 70-200 type lens, f4, I feel IS is not all that important, it is light and easily hanheld. But you should know your physical prowess, and the conditions under which you take the majority of your photos with your old lens. How many times did you have to rely on the IS to get the shot. Analyze, then decide.

[elsahoffmann]

#297935

to be honest – I never use VR (IS for Canon) on any of my lenses – it is permanently turned off.

[Jeffreysa]

#297937

The IS version of this lens is much sharper than the non IS. There is more to their differences than just the IS implementation. I had the IS version and was very happy.

[elsahoffmann]

#297936

I would agree with Jeffrey that there is more to the lens than just the IS function

[Anonymous]

#297938

Thank you all for your input. then IS I will look for.

any views on the sigma 70-200 2.8 ex dg hsm?

Phil

[SimonDP]

#297934

@Philla 297615 wrote:

Thank you all for your input. then IS I will look for.

any views on the sigma 70-200 2.8 ex dg hsm?

Phil

A nice lens, cheaper than the Canon version, and quite good, but not as sharp overall as the Canon. Older design too.

[compasiune11]

#297939

Very shap lens from Canon and a good pice too.

[Author]

Posts