IS How much is it worth?

Dfhaii · 14 Oct 2008 at 18:13

Hi all,
I'm looking to buy a mid tele zoom, and am pretty much set on Canon's 70-200 2.8, the only thing I'm unsure of is whether IS is actually worth another £400 or so.

I've used the 200 2.8 L prime before now a fair bit, and didn't find not having any kind of IS a problem, but would I be likely to want it on the heavier, larger zoom?

Does anyone have experience with both, or is it worth hiring both for a weekend to see how I get on with them?

The other alternative, though not a zoom, is the 135 f2L, 200 f2.8L and my existing 85 1.8 for a similar price as the IS zoom.

Who's been in a similar quandary and what did you do to resolve it?

Cheers.

Dfhaii · 14 Oct 2008 at 19:17

Another thing to consider is, how bad on batteries is IS? I'd be using it with an EOS 5 and don't want to have to change the battery every 10 minutes or so as they're not cheap!

Dfhaii · 14 Oct 2008 at 19:22

rpstewart said:
Do you need f/2.8?

Maybe not need, but would prefer. I generally use fairly slow film (velvia 50, provia 100f or pan f+ (50) and fp4+ (125)) so the quicker the better. Also chances are I'd buy a teleconverter at some point down the line so again the 2.8 would help there.

Dfhaii · 14 Oct 2008 at 21:12

What camera was that with though? Mine isn't some fancypants dSLR with rechargeable moon batteries.

Dfhaii · 16 Oct 2008 at 08:07

I'm currently leaning more towards the two primes way, just need to get somewhere to try the zooms out to see what I think of them.