Is the 16-35 f2.8 for $1000 a better deal than the f4 version for the same?

[jdramirez]

There's a like new mkii version for sale locally... I think I can probably get the price to $900 or $950, but obviously the f4 version is widely lauded for roughly the same price.

Here's the rub... I don't like wide angle photography, so I would only rarely use it... But let's not go into that. For the same money... Would the f2.8 mkii version be a better purchase than the f4?

 

[mackguyver]

There's a like new mkii version for sale locally... I think I can probably get the price to $900 or $950, but obviously the f4 version is widely lauded for roughly the same price.

Here's the rub... I don't like wide angle photography, so I would only rarely use it... But let's not go into that. For the same money... Would the f2.8 mkii version be a better purchase than the f4?

Do you need f/2/8? I.e. for events, sports, or other stuff where low light and action stopping shutter speeds are critical and going up one ISO stop is a deal-breaker? If yes, go for the f/2.8 II. If not and you want the best IQ, and everything else, then the f/4 IS will be a much better choice.

 

[Eldar]

The only thing the f2.8 has, that the f4 doesn´t have, is f2.8. In my view, the f4 win every other objective measure. If you buy it to sell it, it might be that the f2.8 is a better buy, because it may hold its value better (since the one you refer to already is very cheap). But the only valid reason to buy, it my view, is if you really need that extra stop.