What do you lose, if anything, going from 70-200 f4L to the f2.8L. I purchased the Cannon 30D with the 70-200 f4L. It will be used mostly outdoors on the boat. However, I have three boys who also play Basketball. Should I have purchased the f2.8L.

i am shooting with the f4 right now and it is a awesome lens... <BR> <BR>however, when i was at the beach around sunset, i had to push the iso to 800 (whiched worked but the lens focus was slow).. <BR> <BR>if you dont have a 2.8 or 1.8 lens and dont want to buy one, i would go the 2.8 if you got the extra coin..

Thanks Mike. I will be purchasing a wide angle lens in the near future. The 70-200 f2.8 sounds like it will be more versatile (indoors). Have you tried a higher ISO indoors with your f4.

The approach I would take is finding the minimum shutter needed to freeze the movement of your boys in the average light they play in. Once you have established that see where your minimum aperture puts the exposure at. If you find you can get decent exposure at f4 without too much ISO then you're in good shape. Nothing wrong at ISO 1600-3200 that photoshop and Noise Ninja won't fix. <BR> <BR>BTW Noise Ninja has already released their filters for PS CS3 and it just flies on my Intel Mac. <BR> <BR>See what you can do with the f4 before you give up on it but if $ isn't a big deal the 70-200 f2.8 L IS is one of the greaest all around zooms ever made.

Okay, say I keep the 70-200 f4 and purchase a second lens. What would you recommend for indoor sports (youth basketball). I don't want to sacrifice sharpness btw.

along -was shooting with the 70-200 f4 with a iso of 800.. <BR> <BR>if you wanted one lense then the 70-200 f2.8 for $1100 or the 70-200 f4 &amp; the canon 85 f1.8 prime ($900 for both) the 85 f1.8 is reputed to be a fast, sharp,nice bokah lense, and only $325 new...this is reputed to be one of canons best lense.. the major drawback is no zoom)

If your going to be shooting in a gym get the 2.8. <BR> <BR>I love my 70-200 f/4 but it sucks in low light. IMO a prime lens wouldn't be very practical for indoor sports.

"I don't want to sacrifice sharpness btw." <BR> <BR>The pixel peepers will tell you sell all your zooms then and go with primes only! (j/k) <BR> <BR>You do get a lot more speed with the fast primes however. check out the 50 f1.4, 50 f1.8, 85 f1.8 and 100 macro. <BR> <BR>Have you actually tried the 70-200f4 yet at the court?

Okay, after considering a second lens and the activities I'll be shooting, I've decided to go with the 2.8. f/4 is a great lens. However, I know I would be saying, " shoulda, woulda, coulda," in the gym or trying to capture that action shot with the sunset in the background. <BR>Also, thanks to all who replied. Your opinions are well respected.

Sorry Rich. I didn't see your reply. I tried the lens shooting my kids playing tag at sunset. BTW I'm a newby and I'm still learning. However, the shots I took didn't seem sharp, certainly not what I expected. Also, I tried a tripod and it didn't help. They probably could be improved with photoshop, like you mentioned. I still think the f/4 is a great lens (in the sunshine) I just think the 2.8 will allow me more uses. After considering a second lens, the price wasn't that much different.

Faster is always better when it comes to lenses but I'm not sure you'll get better sunset shots at f2.8 as that sounds like more of an exposure/dynamic range issue but you really can't go wrong with the 70-200 f2.8 and you'll know you probably have the best tool for the job.

IMO-for the vast majority of people (90-95%) a 2.8 lens is overkill and the extra stop will never "really" get taken advantage of. I had only a Tamron 28-200 my 1st year doing proffesional photography and I got 2 catalog covers, a resort brochere cover, and close to 30 pics published in a 1/2 dozen ski/snowboard magazines. I honestly feel that learning to compensate for my equipment in certain situations made me a more able photographer than if I went out and bought all the best equipment right off the bat. <BR> <BR>(good equipment doesn't make a good photographer)

Sean, I've read many of your post and respect your opinion. However, most of your examples are outdoor shots. Do you feel the same if you were shooting indoor events. BTW I agree that pushing your equipment and skill to the limits are the best way to learn and improve. "If your not crashing your not pushing hard enough."

To quote the legendary Dave Cervanka (Kung fu) <BR> <BR>"It's all in the lighting" <BR> <BR>My best shots have always come from situations where the light was perfect not with any given lens or body. <BR> <BR> I have myself, as much as anyone, fallen for the "got to have that lens" Jones-in when you see someone post some incredible shot thinking that's all one needs to make images like those. <BR> <BR>Sean, you make some great points! <BR> <BR>These are just tools, you can dig a hole with a shovel or a back hoe. You only need the back hoe when you're digging a lot of holes! (and of course knowing how to operate the Hoe kinda helps as well)

Okay, remember I'm a newby and write with little camera experience. I would agree that "It's all in the lighting," and the best shots will come from perfect lighting. However, what about when lighting is poor. Can you truely make up the extra stops a 2.8 gives you with photoshop or push the ISO. Also, I agree that it's easy to dig a hole. Salesmen love newbys like me. I've often said we all pay alot for being ignorant. This is why I'm on here, trying to educate myself!

Along, I am in the same quandary. I picked up the f4l is vs the f2.8l is. Outside the f4 looks pretty damn good. Tonight I head indoors to test out at my sons hockey scrimmage. <BR> <BR>Here is one shot outdoors I posted in an earlier thread: Canon 30d f4l is <BR> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399346.jpg" alt="Upload">

Mike, nice shot. Let me know how it works out indoors (Hockey, right?). I tried the f4 while my kids were playing tag at sunset. I wasn't impressed. However, I'll be the first to admit it could have been operator error!

Mike, make sure you give use the indoor f4 report tomorrow........... <BR> <BR>No hockey here until after the first of the year....

Well back from Hockey. I took about 300 pics standing 5 rows up between the blue line and top of the circle. <BR> <BR>Camera settings: <BR>File Name IMG_0803.JPG <BR>Camera Model Canon EOS 30D <BR>Shooting Date/Time 12/28/2006 5:13:11 PM <BR>Shooting Mode Program AE <BR>Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/250 <BR>Av( Aperture Value ) 5.6 <BR>Metering Mode Evaluative Metering <BR>Exposure Compensation 0 <BR>ISO Speed 800 <BR>Lens EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM <BR>Focal Length 121.0 mm <BR>Image Size 3504x2336 <BR>Image Quality Fine <BR>Flash Off <BR>White Balance Mode Auto <BR>AF Mode AI Focus AF <BR>Picture Style Standard <BR>Sharpness 3 <BR>Contrast 0 <BR>Saturation 0 <BR>Color tone 0 <BR>Color Space sRGB <BR>Noise Reduction Off <BR>File Size 3631 KB <BR> <BR>I varied the ISO from 640-1250 and that is all: <BR> <BR>iso 800 <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399397.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399398.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>iso640 <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399399.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399400.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>iso1000 <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399401.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399402.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>This is just a small sampling. Obviously, many more things to improve upon. Comments/suggestions welcomed.

iso 1250 <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399407.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399408.jpg" alt="Upload">

I tried to shoot my brother at his mixed martial arts training tonight. I had to use the cheap 18-55mm lens since I was ringside and the 70-200 was too much. Needless to say, all my shots were either underexposed or blurred from slow shutter speed. I didn't expect great shots. I just wanted to play around with my settings. My Av was between 3.5 - 5.6 and Tv between 1/30 - 1/200. The poor lens or poor technique could have been the problem. I suspect a combination to be the problem. I'll keep at it though!!! <BR>Mike, the close up looks the sharpest. What was that setting, if you recall.

Those look a tad underexposed because of all the ice messing with the evaluative metering. Either shoot RAW and push in post or dial up a little positive exposure compensation (overexpose). You don't want to underexpose at high ISO's that just invites extra noise in the image. You're getting a tiny bit of motion blur so based on your exif data I'd dial up 1/320th or 500th, an extra stop of positive exp comp. and if f4 is still underexposing push the ISO up to 1250. Watch the histogram and over expose until you're just touching the right side at 100% (that will be the ice). Based on your exif data I'd say you've got plenty of leeway with the f4 lens.

Those look a tad underexposed because of all the ice messing with the evaluative metering. Either shoot RAW and push in post or dial up a little positive exposure compensation (overexpose). You don't want to underexpose at high ISO's that just invites extra noise in the image. You're getting a tiny bit of motion blur so based on your exif data I'd dial up 1/320th or 500th, an extra stop of positive exp comp. and if f4 is still underexposing push the ISO up to 1250. Watch the histogram and over expose until you're just touching the right side at 100% (that will be the ice). Based on your exif data I'd say you've got plenty of leeway with the f4 lens.

I took one of your shots into photoshop and did a quick levels adjustment on it. As I suspected the whites were well short of 100% since the camera tries to expose the scene at 18% grey and get's fooled by all the ice. Here's the shot after. You could do this very easily and more effctively if you shoot these in RAW. <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399459.jpg" alt="Upload">

This one's actually a little better example, if I had to guess I'd say 2/3rds of a stop would do it. <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399462.jpg" alt="Upload">

Thanks for the suggestions. I will give it a try. Here is the info on the closeup: <BR>File Name IMG_0901.JPG <BR>Camera Model Canon EOS 30D <BR>Shooting Date/Time 12/28/2006 5:24:44 PM <BR>Shooting Mode Program AE <BR>Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/320 <BR>Av( Aperture Value ) 5.6 <BR>Metering Mode Evaluative Metering <BR>Exposure Compensation 0 <BR>ISO Speed 1000 <BR>Lens EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM <BR>Focal Length 176.0 mm <BR>Image Size 3504x2336 <BR>Image Quality Fine <BR>Flash Off <BR>White Balance Mode Auto <BR>AF Mode AI Focus AF <BR>Picture Style Standard <BR>Sharpness 3 <BR>Contrast 0 <BR>Saturation 0 <BR>Color tone 0 <BR>Color Space sRGB <BR>Noise Reduction Off <BR>File Size 3213 KB

I couldn't push the cheap 18-55 lens to those settings when I zoomed in. I had to keep the shutter speed at 1/30 at 5.6. Obviously not good for action shots.

<img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/rofl.gif" border=0><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/rofl.gif" border=0><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/rofl.gif" border=0>...I read this stuff and it is sooooooo foreign to me. I have a ton to learn. <BR> <BR>I will say that though I would not say I have an eye for noticing any differences in this stuff, from what I see....your shots with the 4 are not much, if any, different than what I am getting with my 2.8 Maybe as I learn, there will be more noticeable differences... <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399526.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399527.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR>First is with my 2.8, second is with a rented 2.8IS

E.J. what were your settings? To my understanding, if your Av wasn't set below 4.0 then your not taking advantage or not needing the 2.8. I think! I'm still learning.

I could not tell you for sure on those 2 shots. <BR> <BR>I "think" the last game I shot was locked at 2.8, 1/500 and ISO 1600..... If I wrote that out correctly? <BR> <BR>I have been messing around with something different almost every time I go out. The last game(adults) was the best so far... Let me go see, what I can find...I think I posted something.

Here is one.... <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399537.jpg" alt="Upload">

That looks pretty good! Above the glass?

Went to open skate to try out the suggestions: <BR> <BR>I played with aperature/shutter priority for various settings (iso/f/shutter). What I think I discovered is that their is not "one" good setting. <BR>File Name IMG_1174.JPG <BR>Camera Model Canon EOS 30D <BR>Shooting Date/Time 12/29/2006 1:38:06 PM <BR>Shooting Mode Shutter-Priority AE <BR>Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/640 <BR>Av( Aperture Value ) 4.0 <BR>Metering Mode Spot Metering <BR>Exposure Compensation +1 <BR>ISO Speed 1600 <BR>Lens EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM <BR>Focal Length 155.0 mm <BR>Image Size 3504x2336 <BR>Image Quality Fine <BR>Flash Off <BR>White Balance Mode Auto <BR>AF Mode AI Focus AF <BR>Picture Style Standard <BR>Sharpness 3 <BR>Contrast 0 <BR>Saturation 0 <BR>Color tone 0 <BR>Color Space sRGB <BR>Noise Reduction Off <BR>File Size 2844 KB <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399604.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>File Name IMG_1237.JPG <BR>Camera Model Canon EOS 30D <BR>Shooting Date/Time 12/29/2006 1:48:25 PM <BR>Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE <BR>Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/250 <BR>Av( Aperture Value ) 4.0 <BR>Metering Mode Spot Metering <BR>Exposure Compensation +2/3 <BR>ISO Speed 1000 <BR>Lens EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM <BR>Focal Length 127.0 mm <BR>Image Size 3504x2336 <BR>Image Quality Fine <BR>Flash Off <BR>White Balance Mode Auto <BR>AF Mode AI Focus AF <BR>Picture Style Standard <BR>Sharpness 3 <BR>Contrast 0 <BR>Saturation 0 <BR>Color tone 0 <BR>Color Space sRGB <BR>Noise Reduction Off <BR>File Size 2733 KB <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399605.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>I think I can get what I want. Just need more practice. Mike.

Tough call deciding between aperture or shutter priority...any suggestions? <BR> <BR>File Name IMG_1261.JPG <BR>Camera Model Canon EOS 30D <BR>Shooting Date/Time 12/29/2006 1:51:27 PM <BR>Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE <BR>Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/400 <BR>Av( Aperture Value ) 4.0 <BR>Metering Mode Spot Metering <BR>Exposure Compensation +2/3 <BR>ISO Speed 1000 <BR>Lens EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM <BR>Focal Length 85.0 mm <BR>Image Size 3504x2336 <BR>Image Quality Fine <BR>Flash Off <BR>White Balance Mode Auto <BR>AF Mode AI Focus AF <BR>Picture Style Standard <BR>Sharpness 3 <BR>Contrast 0 <BR>Saturation 0 <BR>Color tone 0 <BR>Color Space sRGB <BR>Noise Reduction Off <BR>File Size 2687 KB <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399618.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>Slightly underexposed but at iso 1000.

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>Tough call deciding between aperture or shutter priority...any suggestions?<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR> <BR>Shoot on manual.

Here is the histogram of that last shot of Mike's, it shows that the exposure isn't bad. The spike represents all the ice and the closer it is to the far right the better. If I was shooting this like you guys I would be watching the histogram whenever possible and trying to keep the all the white highlites as close to the right (100% white) as I could without going past and blowing them out. As I said the builtin metering is always trying to balance the scene out to 18% grey and large amounts of black or white fool it. That's why, in most of those shots posted above, the ice appears grey. As far as the rest goes I think it's obvious you need to maintain a high enough shutter to freeze motion and balance your aperture and ISO accordingly. Shooting wide open isn't necessarily always good if you can't get all the players in focus either. I agree with Walt, shoot manual and RAW, get the best average exposure you can watching the histogram and then tweak the exposure as needed when you process the RAW shots.<img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/399680.jpg" alt="Upload">

The first 2 shots of E.J.'s are a good example of what you get with fast apertures like f2.8 and less: shallow depth of field. <BR> <BR>Notice how only one of the players is in focus in both his shots. Is this bad? Not necessarily but one has to account for it. If those were shot with that much zoom at say f2 or f1.8 only part of one player like possibly his head or arm would be in focus. <BR> <BR>Everything's a tradeoff when shooting low light action. The Pro sports shooters are great at composing their shots so that background blur caused by shallow DOF is where they want it and all the foreground interest is in sharp focus.

YOU DA MAN RICH!