Well, my next lens (after my lovely nifty fifty) is planned to be a 70-200 canon.

My problem is....Which one?

There is the f/4, f/4 IS, f/2.8, and f/2.8 IS (I think thats it, for the most part). The 2.8IS is more than I can reasonably afford, so thats out. I want the lens to be able to take pictures of fast moving subjects, and am unsure if f/4 can handle it. By fast moving, I mainly mean the ability to do high school level sports. This would be done from a tripod, assuming that matters. The body it will be on, for the time being (and for quite some time into the future), is the 500D, so not the best ISO abilities to get a faster Shutter speed.

EDIT: oh, and if I go f/4, it will be the IS version.

This post was edited by Bundy3 on Apr 24 2011 07:43pm

you dont want IS when you want to stop motion, you want 2.8. i coubt f/4 will be enough for you needs(if even 2.8 is). also you wont need a tripod because you need to stop the players motion and you are not using like 500mm lens, so you dont have to worry about camera shake. IS might help on other situations tho, but you might want 2.8 for better dof control..

This post was edited by Antichrist- on Apr 24 2011 07:57pm

Indoor sports - I don't recommend the 4.0... not even sure about outdoor yet on that one. I had a hard time getting a fast enough shutter speed with that f stop.

I have the 4.0IS - but I plan to use it more outside than for sports. 2.8 is really expensive, but if you can afford it, go for it bro!

This post was edited by Chantal7 on Apr 24 2011 09:32pm

i have the f/2.8 IS and love it, but truthfully it is more than most ppl would ever need
it does depend on if you are shooting indoors or outdoors, outdoor f/4 will be great
indoor the f/2.8 only gains you 1 extra stop in ISO, which can help but may not be such a great advantage

if you are not planning on making money off it (or maybe a little $$$ here and there) then get the f/4
if you are making money then go straight for the f/2.8 IS
remember you could always upgrade at a later stage if you do make money, but you could never go from the f/2.8 IS down to the f/4

I'd rather get the 70-200 F4 L IS than the 70-200 F2.8 L IS version 1. Not only is it less expensive, it's sharper, lighter, and I currently have 1 for sale (i've had it for sale for a while, but it's hard to let go of such a gfg backup lens).

That's why I went with that one... but I do wish I could shoot indoor sports with it just for the odd time I have the chance.

You can. Bump up your iso!

id rather get sigma 70-200 2.8 non IS than canon f/4 IS. f/4 is a definite no no to me with lens this focal length, its ok if the lens is like 300-400mm, but 70-200 with 4 is just lol. same as getting a 50mm, but 2.8 instead 1.8 or 1.4..

It's a great studio lens if you ever need to shoot in a studio

The siggy is a piece of shit, what are you talking about?