Later, I took a few shots with 70-200 f2.8 Sigma and several with 300mm f2.8 Sigma, but mostly with 24-105L. The latter is so versatile that I'd regard it as a must. SIgma 70-200 F2.8 at f2.8. The Canon would be a little sharper than this at this focal length, but not at shorter ones, where the Sigma is amazing. T. Crop from 24-105L.
A practical comparison of the features of the f/4 and f/2.8 versions of the Canon 70-200mm IS lens. I discuss the feature differences that have an impact on
if I had no need for 2.8 and f/4 was all I wanted, the RF lens is smaller, lighter and the optics are fantastic. I use the same 70-200 and I picked up the f/4 at a Canon store a few months ago and it felt almost criminal how light the f/4 was. From what I heard, tamron 70-200 f/2.8 on a Sony A700 focus rather fast. I don't know if the Nikon mount is a screw-drive or lens in motor, but I would stay away from tamron's micro-motor at all cost. wssfcop wrote: I am considering purchasing a lens for my Canon 30D. I have narrowed it to two, the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 or the Canon 70-200 f4 IS. Trusted Optics. I tested the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM with Canon's most demanding camera, the 50MP EOS 5DS R, and Imatest software. At 70mm f/2.8, the lens puts up scores that we qualify as very . 366 51 458 446 71 4 196 1

canon 70 200 f4 vs f2 8