SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

TX, I wasn't questioning in any way that YOU don't need the lens. Many shoot indoor sports and need some speed.
But let's keep it in perspective for someone that is simply asking I'd the need it. I don't recall the OP stating they shoot I for sports. And let's also make sure everyone knows it's just "one stop" faster. At any given setting, it's the difference between ISO 100 and 200. Or 400 and 800 etc.
maybe a person can get by with the f4 non IS and still have money to buy an 85 1.8 for portraits and a 50 1.4 and a tripod!!
That's MY line of thinking.
SS

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Hey SS, I'm with you - everyone needs to analyze their own needs and budgets and optimize based on what they can spend, and I agree 2 primes and a tripod might be a better choice depending on their needs. (I have the 85 1.8, and it's a bargain in my book. In fact, it may be the lens I take to the wedding to save weight/size). I will note that while ISO 400 vs 800 may not be a big deal, 1600 vs 3200 or 3200 vs 6400 can be. In general though, my feeling would be to buy the best and fastest glass you can afford (maybe buying used or refurbished) and keep it forever.

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

I think that you did not understand my post. I do see the light. I don't currently have that lens as I don't need the FL or the speed. It was great to shoot swim comp in dark venues, but most venues are not dark. My GD is not in comp at this time. I am not currently shooting wild life. And I have one more glass to liquidate and then decide if in fact I need it. Art Wolf says that if he does not need speed he will always pull the f/4 because of weight. I stand by what I wrote.

J. R.

mikedidi46 Loc: WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA

I have the 70D and 2 'L' lens, they are excellent

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

I used to own a Canon 7D mark 11 and a Canon 70D. I always used Canon L lenses with them - typically a 300mm f2.8L IS, a 100 - 400mm f4.5/5.6L IS mark 11 and a 100mm f2.8L IS macro. The results were fantastic. I do believe, however, that which standard of lens you choose comes down to what you, as an individual, believes is acceptably sharp. If, for agument sake, you wish to use the camera for family photographs and sports day type events, do you really require to go to the expense of L series lenses. I am a wildlife photographer and keen to obtain as good an image as I reasonably can, so I buy L series type lenses (though now I use Olympus so I have a number of PRO lenses).

If you are going to purchase the camera and lens from a shop, drop in and ask to try out the 70 - 200mm L series and the EF-S equivalent. Set the camera up to lets say ISO 200, set the aperture up to wide open for each lens and take a few shots of the same subject. Then choose an aperture of say f8 for both lenses and take a few more shots. I always shoot RAW but you may prefer JPEG, but take the SD card home and display the results on your processing software on your normal viewing platform and see which you prefer. If the EF-S quality is acceptable to you why bother with the more expensive lens? What I would say, though, is that the 70 - 200mm f2.8L IS 11 also works superbly with the Canon x2 TC, whereas the EF - S would not be as good. Best of luck.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Not true... Tony Lathrop did a video on this in 12/2015. You can also do this yourself using DxO LAbs. Take Nikon 7200 and put a 80 mm FF lens on it and then put a 80 mm DX and the DX is just as sharp. It debunks that theory that no one has proven with hard data that FF lens using the center image area of the lens produces sharper images. What does make sense is that a lens that matches the sensor as designed will produce good results.

wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

I own 3, the 100-400l ver 1 ,24-70 2.8l ver 1 and 16-35 2.8 l. Bought my first digital camera years ago it was a rebel xti with a tamron16-200 3.5/6.3 non l lens I was very satisfied as a beginner then I started buying l lens and never looked back. yes a bit bigger and heavier but worth it! I also rented the 70-200 2.8 for my granddaughter recital stood in the back of a large auditorium got great results from there with a mono pod on my 7d m2. I would say if you have$$$ go for it. Think about getting the version 2 lens I'm thinking of trading my version 1 len's for version 2 once I hit the lottery😁😁.

dirty dave

I have always heard that the middle of the lens was the sweet spot. And when using a crop sensor camera with a full frame lens you will use the sweet spot and a little better picture than usual.

Basil Loc: New Mexico

A friend and former co-worker turned me on to L-Lenses. The first one I bought was the 70-200 L f4 (used) and was so impressed with the clarity of the images on my 7D that I have acquired a few others since.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

This!!!
L lenses are the top of the Canon line and you will have a lens that works if you ever go full frame in the future. Plus if you decide to sell, they should hold their value well if decently cared for too. The penalty if you consider it one will be cost, size, weight and a narrower field of view on a crop sensor. But sometimes the narrower field of view can be used to your advantage too.

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Not true... Tony Lathrop did a video on 12/15. In addition you can test this yourself with Nikon equipment with DxO labs interactive software, Take DX 7200 crop sensor camera and put a 80 mm FX and a 80 mm DX lens on it and the sharpness is the same.

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

Hi Mike

I have a 70-200L f4 IS and have tack sharp photos with my Canon 7D ver1. You will very happy with this len's on Yoru 80D.

Basil Loc: New Mexico

Who is Tony Lathrop?

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Think Northrop is the name he meant...

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

davidk2020 Loc: San Diego

Chelsea Clinton's husband.