# NEED HELP!!! 70-200 F/2.8L IS II USM vs. 70-200 F/4L IS USM



## canon23 (Aug 18, 2012)

Ok fellow Photogs,

I know someone just posted a very similar post but he was comparing the f/4 IS w/the f/2.8 non IS.
Canon's having another rebate and I just purchased the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM for $2200. However reading some of the posts from the other similar question, I'm starting to think, should I return the 2.8 IS II & get the f/4 IS for a $1,000 less and use that to get my next desired lens, the 35mm f/1.4 selling for $1329 now at B & H. (total of these latter 2 options will be $2528, which is only $328 more than what I paid for the f/2.8 but at least w/this option, I have 2 lenses. 

Now, I shoot w/the 5D Mark 2 w/grip and have the speedlite 430EX. I also currently have the 24-105L and 50 f/1.8 II. I do not shoot action, no sports, etc. I do portraitures, scenery, vacations, indoors, and assist w/weddings here and there. What's the better option for me:

1) stick w/the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II or
2) go w/the 70-200 f/4 IS & 35 mm f/1.4 (or something else/a prime you would recommend in this price range for what I'm shooting).

Please share you valuable insights
Thanks a lot!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2012)

For portraits, I'd stick with the f/2.8 IS II for the better subject isolation.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 18, 2012)

I'd stick with the 70-200 II for portraiture and for assisting weddings. It is heavier, so a strap is helpful. The 35L is a great lens too, but I'd stay with the 70-200 II and save up for the 35L.


----------



## DMITPHOTO (Aug 18, 2012)

I started with the f/4 to save money for other lenses I wanted, but then used a friends f2.8 and you can't beat the 2.8 the f4 is a good lens but in my opinion the 2.8 beats it!


----------



## Halfrack (Aug 18, 2012)

Ignore your idea of returning the IS II and go have fun. You may not be shooting at all times at 2.8, but to have it will come in handy time and time again (auto-focus, reception lighting)..


----------



## well_dunno (Aug 18, 2012)

+1 to previous posts - I have an f/4 IS which is by all means a great lens but unless weight or cost is the issue (I imagine they are not since you already own the f/2.8), f/2.8 IS II is the better option...

Cheers!


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 18, 2012)

I'm going to annoy everyone by saying it again. The f/2.8 lens is a Group A lens while the f/4 lens is a Group C lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> I'm going to annoy everyone by saying it again. The f/2.8 lens is a Group A lens while the f/4 lens is a Group C lens.



True...but how is that relevant to the OP? 



canon23 said:


> I shoot w/the 5D Mark 2


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 18, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm going to annoy everyone by saying it again. The f/2.8 lens is a Group A lens while the f/4 lens is a Group C lens.
> ...



It worked!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2012)

Touché.


----------



## Menace (Aug 21, 2012)

Keep the 70-200 2.8 IS II and save for the 35L.


----------

