Originally posted by Rondec I understand. But why do people buy the Canon 70-200 f4 rather than the 70-200 f2.8? It may be the smaller size. It may be that it is really sharp from f4 on, but I think if we are honest the 70-200 f4 without IS runs 600 dollars and with runs 1100 dollars, while the 70-200 IS II is 1949.
Let me tell you why I didn't bought Canon 70-200mm f2.8L IS and I opted to spend the money to buy a 70-200mm F4L IS and another lens.
I didn't wanted to save some money, that's for sure.
1. The 70-200mm f4 lens is half the weight of the one with f2.8 aperture
2. The 70-200mm f4 lens is smaller, but it has exactly the same solid construction as its big brother
3. It's very sharp from f4
4. It's a lot more fun to use it
5. It's half the price of a 70-200mm f2.8 lens. With the price difference I bought a Canon 135mm f2L lens and I have 2 excelent lenses in my backpack instead of one big and heavy lens.
If I were a sports photographer and if my main events were indoor, a 70-200mm f2.8 with a monopod would have been my choice. But, I wouldn't use a 70-200mm f2.8 for portraits or for events (like weddings for example) even if someone would give me one for free. Why I won't use one? Because:
- it's too heavy
- it's very big, it draw attention to it and people become uncomfortable when they see a big lens pointed to them
- I would rather use an 85mm f1.2 or the new 85mm f1.4L IS lens as a tele lens for indoor and gain also a stop of light