Advice: Should I sell my 24-70mm f2.8L (I) and get the 24-70mm f4L IS?

[Hjalmarg1]

I have read that the 24-70mm f4L IS has less distortion than the old 24-70mm f2.8L, in addition to the Image stabilization and lighter weight so I am considering to get the IS version. I don't shoot much portrait and fast pace events so, I think the 4-stop IS may help me more on low light situations. I am just a hobbyiest, not a pro?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

 

[Menace]

Try renting or borrowing to get a hands on feel, or even try one in a shop if possible at all.

Have a look at your Exit data to see at what aperture majority of your shots have been taken I.e. If a large % are at f 2.8 then you really will miss that 1 stop loss.

 

[Random Orbits]

It looks like you've got the lenses to cover your low light/non flash needs, so if you think the 24-70 f/4 IS will be a good fit, then go for it!

It will require a change in how you use the lenses, but your primes will be used more. I'm assuming that you'd be selling your existing 240-70, but how about your 15-85? Perhaps a 10-22 would be a better complement for your WA/UWA needs.

 

[Ruined]

I have read that the 24-70mm f4L IS has less distortion than the old 24-70mm f2.8L, in addition to the Image stabilization and lighter weight so I am considering to get the IS version. I don't shoot much portrait and fast pace events so, I think the 4-stop IS may help me more on low light situations. I am just a hobbyiest, not a pro?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

What are you shooting? Due to the shorter focal length, the IS in the 24-70 IS primarily helps with still life/object photography and video. If you are shooting anything that might be moving even slightly the IS really will not help as much as f/2.8 and you are probably better keeping the 24-70 f/2.8 I for low light.

If you do primarily shoot still life or video, then yes the f/4 IS would probably be a better bet.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Thanks to all for your comments. It looks based on your comments that keeping the old 24-70mm 2.8L is still a better option.
I don't shoot movies but stills are my preferred subject even under low light conditions.

 

[EBB281]

[size=24pt][size=18pt]I think Canon Lenses are to expensive!! So i looked into the Rokinon set of primes great prices and quality here is the Rokinon 24mm Test :)[/size][/size]
http://youtu.be/Wh3RsYQ-mio

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have read that the 24-70mm f4L IS has less distortion than the old 24-70mm f2.8L, in addition to the Image stabilization and lighter weight so I am considering to get the IS version. I don't shoot much portrait and fast pace events so, I think the 4-stop IS may help me more on low light situations. I am just a hobbyiest, not a pro?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

You will notice the difference! I've had 5 of the old 24-70mm L's and was unhappy with all of them. Even my 24-105mmL was slightly better.