70-200 f/2.8 II or f/4 vs. 200/2.8 prime

[cheeseheadsaint]

^I've been looking at many price graphs and all have the pattern of being super low between the day after thanksgiving to christmas before skyrocketing back up again... until the next year when it goes super low again.

I think the price is going to rise but whether it will dips as deep next Christmas, I'm wondering the same thing.

 

[Edwin Herdman]

I own the 70-200 2.8 IS II and it's a fine lens-no doubt about that. But nothing beats an L prime IMO. They're fine as.

Actually, in terms of IQ at least, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II does beat the 200mm f/2.8L II prime. Of course, there are costs in terms of size, weight, and actual cost for that slight IQ benefit.

Sharpness only, or defocus area quality? The 200mm f/2.8 prime might not be as sharp but it may have better boke (or not) - just asking, because I don't know for sure (I could run to Photozone, but eh...)