Torn between 2 L's, comments appreciated.

[terence_tong1]

Came back from the local camera show the other day, found these 2

beauty at the show, what would you choose? For the same of argument,

let's say the glass are in excellent condition

 

80-200 2.8 L w/ collar, body at around 80-85% with few scratches

or

70-200 f/4 L NO collar, body at 90%, factory refurb

 

the price is $25 more on the f/4, w/ the f/2.8 @$450

 

What do you guys think?

 

TT

[mike_broderick]

Choosing between the two lenses--The 70-200/4 lens is much more useful. I shoot landscapes and travel a lot, so don't need f/2.8 and do need light weight. You may not care about those issues.

 

In your case, if you MUST have f/2.8, and don't mind the risk of spare parts being scarce, the older f/2.8 is the clear choice. To my mind, a brand new f/4 lens from B&H for about $100 more is the preferred alternate (not the one at the show). If the $100 is a VERY large amount of money to you, you may feel otherwise. But this Fall there's a fair chance of a Canon rebate letting you cut the price for a new F/4 some more.

[kaden_n]

Wow, I have a 70-200mm, but I would be interested in the 80-200mm if you don't buy it..

 

Let me know when you decide.

[bens]

all depends what you like to shoot. the f.4 for travel,the 2.8 for anything indoors or sports action generally.

[jcolwell]

I have the 80-200/2.8 L and it is dynamite. I think that the trade off is between the light weight and USM of the 70-200/4 and the +1 stop of the /2.8, which provides a brighter viewfinder, better low light capability (both inside and outside) and additional DOF control. The /2.8 does not have USM with full time manual focus, but it does focus fast enough for most purposes, and works well with AI Servo AF mode. The difference between 70 and 80mm at the wide end may be a consideration if you have only a 17-40 or similar, but makes no difference if you have something in the 28-70 (or so) range. A tripod mount is also useful on any lens that makes the camera front-heavy (as both of these do). The Tripod Mount Ring A(B) included with the /2.8 costs about $90 US new and a new Tripod Mount Ring A(W) for the /4 will set you back about $120 US (same mount rings, different colours). You should also have a hood for either lens.

[yakim_peled1]

I vote for the f/4 for its lighter weight, USM, smaller filter size and TC compatibility.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[jbq]

That might depend on the body you plan to mount it in (i.e. whether you have a body capable of focusing more precisely with f/2.8 lenses).

 

I would personally be tempted by the 80-200/2.8. If I want something small and light, I use a 80-200/4.5-5.6, not a 70-200/4 (I have those last two lenses).

[steve_dunn2]

<p>One issue others didn't mention (or I overlooked) is the availability of parts for older lenses. IIRC, some people have posted that Canon no longer has all of the parts for this lens and for other lenses of its vintage. So if it ever breaks, you may find it cannot be repaired; you may have to purchase another 80-200, either to replace it, or to be used as a source of parts to fix your first one.</p>

 

<p>Granted, this lens seems to have been pretty reliable, so chances are it won't break on you. But it's something you may wish to keep in mind when making your purchasing decision.</p>