Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM has more in its favour on paper. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM gathers more light for low light and background blur; the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM is lighter and cheaper.
Choose the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM for
- less weight (780g vs 1480g)
- a lower price (about £770 vs £1,100)
Choose the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM for
- a brighter maximum aperture (f/2.8, about 1.0 stops more light)
| EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM | EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM | |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | Canon | Canon |
| Focal length | 70-200mm | 70-200mm |
| Maximum aperture | f/4 | f/2.8 |
| Weight | 780 g | 1480 g |
| Stabilisation | Yes | Yes |
| Weather sealing | Yes | Yes |
| Filter size | 72mm | 77mm |
| Made for | Full frame | Full frame |
| New price | £1,149 | £2,199 |
| Used at MPB (Canon EF / EF-S) | £729–£819 | £954–£1,239 |
Frequently asked questions
Is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM better than the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM?
The EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM offers less weight (780g vs 1480g), a lower price (about £770 vs £1,100); the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM offers a brighter maximum aperture (f/2.8, about 1.0 stops more light).
Which is better value, the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM or the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM?
On Canon EF / EF-S, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM costs about £770 against about £1,100 for the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM (MPB used where listed, otherwise new; checked 5 November 2026).
Is f/2.8 worth it over f/4?
f/2.8 gathers about 1.0 stops more light, which helps indoors, at night and for background blur. If you mostly shoot in good light, the slower lens is usually lighter and cheaper.
Do both lenses fit the same cameras?
Both are available for Canon EF / EF-S.