On 19/09/2012 1:12 p.m., Robert Coe wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:23:11 +1200, Me wrote:
: I think the new OS 50-150 is quite a bit heavier than the older non OS
: version you have, hence most of my negative comments.
: Yes - Sigma make a 70-200 f2.8 OS, less than 100g heavier than the OS
: 50-150, and about $1250 street price. It's probably okay.
: I'm not a Canon owner. There are two things in Canon land that I really
: envy. One is the 17mm TSE, the other is the 70-200 f4 L IS. The latter
: is what you should be getting your wife for Xmas. I have used that lens,
: and it's an absolute gem (on 5D and 5DII bodies). In fact I'd go so far
: as to say that if I decided to buy a Canon body, I'd buy the darned lens
: first, then cart it around camera stores to decide which body suited it
: best.

Why do you prefer the f/4 to the f/2.8? Because it's lighter? The 70-200 I
have is the f/2.8L IS II, and it's plenty sharp for my eyes. But it is heavy,
and I seldom carry it outdoors for that reason. I consider it mainly an indoor
event lens, and it's hard to beat in that role (although maybe a bit long for
my 7D's).

Yes - because it's lighter, much less expensive, and darned good.
Perhaps check exif on files you've taken using the f2.8, even indoors,
and see how often you actually use it fully wide.
The f4 version is possibly better suited to FX than DX, as you've got
the extra stop of high ISO flexibility, as well as the extra stop of
shallow DOF if you need it, and you don't really "lose" the potential
300mm "dx advantage" with a Canon 5DII, as it's plenty sharp enough to
get a 10mp or so "dx crop" from the 35mm frame.
The time I used the 700-200 f4L on a 5DII, the images taken at f4 were
great throughout the focal length range. Contrast was good. I bet that
flare is less of a problem than it may be with the f2.8. The AF seemed
to be blisteringly fast. The IS seemed to be very effective. It's
weather sealed, it felt good (well made) but light weight. It's a pro
lens - nothing feels "budget" about it at all. Current list price is
less than the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS, and not much more than the 50-150
OS. I think that's a great price for what it is.
Nikon users have been talking for years about how an equivalent is
needed, there are always rumours that one is "coming soon". When (or
if) it does, I bet they shaft us for price, but it will still sell like
hot cakes if it's any good.
I am fed up with the weight of my kit, I'm getting older, and the kit
has been getting heavier.