Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM vs f/4L IS USM
Both are Canon EF telephoto zoom lenses for full frame. Here is what actually differs.
Pick the f/2.8L IS III USM if
- You need 1 stop more light for low light or background blur (f/2.8 vs f/4)
- You prefer a newer design: released 2018 vs 2006
- Our notes say it suits: Sports and action, weddings, concerts and events
Pick the f/4L IS USM if
- You want the lighter lens to carry: 720 g lighter (760 g vs 1480 g)
- Our notes say it suits: Travel and landscape, hiking telephoto, outdoor sports
Spec differences
7 differences| f/2.8L IS III USM | f/4L IS USM | |
|---|---|---|
| Max aperture |
f/2.8
1 stop faster
|
f/4
|
| Weight |
1480 g
|
760 g
lighter
|
| Length |
199 mm
|
172 mm
shorter
|
| Diameter |
88.8 mm
|
76 mm
slimmer
|
| Filter thread |
77 mm
|
67 mm
|
| Optical design |
23 elements / 19 groups
|
20 elements / 15 groups
|
| Released |
2018
|
2006
|
10 identical specs hidden: brand, mount, type, format, focal length, min focus distance, max magnification, aperture blades, autofocus motor, image stabilization. Show all
- Brand
- Canon both
- Mount
- Canon EF both
- Type
- Telephoto Zoom both
- Format
- Full frame both
- Focal length
- 70-200mm both
- Min focus distance
- 1.2 m both
- Max magnification
- 0.21× both
- Aperture blades
- 8 both
- Autofocus motor
- USM both
- Image stabilization
- Yes both
Our notes
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
The third version of Canon's pro 70-200mm f/2.8 telephoto zoom, with image stabilization and a weather-sealed L build for sports, weddings and events.
Pros
- Constant f/2.8 aperture
- Image stabilization
- Weather-sealed L build
- Fast ring USM autofocus
Cons
- Heavy to carry all day
- Large front element shows fingerprints and dust
- Only a modest step over the II
Our notes
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
A compact, light telephoto zoom with a constant f/4 aperture and stabilization. Popular with travel, landscape and wildlife photographers who watch their weight.
Pros
- Light and compact for the range
- Sharp optics
- Stabilized
- Dust and water resistant
Cons
- Slower than f/2.8 versions
- Blurred backgrounds are harder to achieve
More comparisons
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM vs Tamron SP AF 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
more reach (200mm) vs 655 g lighter
Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
more reach (300mm) vs stabilized
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM vs Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
0.21× magnification vs focuses closer
Tamron SP 70-300mm F4-5.6 Di VC USD vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
more reach (300mm) vs focuses closer
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM vs Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
more reach (200mm) vs wider (17mm)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM vs Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM Art
125 g lighter vs wider (24mm)