70-200 2.8L IS: Tips of use and getting the most out of it

[piku]

Well, I grabbed the 70-200 for the 3x rebate with my 20D. I've been itching to use it but haven't seen any event that might find great use for it sometime soon (other than http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=134396). While still waiting for that time to come, I was thinking of getting more info and tidbits on what everyone have found useful when shooting with it. So, lets hear 'em =)

TIA
Sherwin

PS. I like shooting low-light and candids, if that provides useful.

[SYS]

Since getting it about a month ago, I've used it for all sorts of occassions: sledding, portraits, low light indoor concerts (ISO 3200), landscapes, you name it. It does great no matter what you shoot. You'll love it. Don't wait for the "right" event. Just aim and shoot!! :D

[DaveG]

I have the non IS 70-200 and love it. Even with IS I'd still recommend that you use a monopod with this lens. It's very heavy and if you hang anything else on it - like a camera body - it's going to cause a lot of fatigue very quickly. I'd rather have the monopod take the weight while I looked for a photograph. The tripod collar also makes using a monopod a joy as you can flip from vertical to horizontal in seconds. As I've written before after a session with this lens and a monopod you'll wish that ALL your lenses had tripod collars.

The other thing is to remember that IS will only hold the lens/camera steadier. It won't do a darn thing about stopping the motion of the subjects. So you will still need fast shutterspeeds if freezing action is your goal. This is kind of a "duh" remark since most people get this, but a few don't and can't figure out why their hockey shots taken at 1/15 of a second aren't sharp! "Canon said, Canon said ..." Well Canon DIDN'T say, they inferred.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

If you can't stop motion at 2.8, you're in for a rough ride. The IS is also useful for panning, by the way.

[DaveG]

If you can't stop motion at 2.8, you're in for a rough ride. The IS is also useful for panning, by the way.

I just assumed that anyone trying to stop action would a) obviously use the lens wide open, b) then they'd use the lowest ISO that gave them: c) the minimum shutterspeed for shooting that particular event. And there are many many times when ISO 3200 @ f2.8 will NOT give you enough shutterspeed to freeze action and it all depends on the light.

As far as that goes f2.8 isn't all that fast. Could you even sell a non macro 50mm lens that's an f2.8? Speed tends to be relative depending on the focal length, with a 600 mm lens being amazingly fast at f4. f2.8 is hardly an ideal solution for low light action stopping photography - in my mind f2.8 is just the fastest they can build a lens of this focal length. But it's hardly the holy grail.

[liza]

The 85mm 1.8 is the Holy Grail. :)

[DaveG]

More like the 85 f1.2.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

You've seen zooms faster than 2.8? I haven't. As you say, even 2.8 isn't fast enough to stop action all the time. However, for those times when it isn't, even at higher ISO's, and you need the length of 200mm, then I'd have to say you shouldn't have tried shooting that event, or you should have shelled out 4k for the 200 1.8. Anyway, anyone getting paid to shoot should know enough to have what they need.

[DaveG]

So use a faster prime. Or put radio slaved monolights in the rafters (cheaper and infinitely more useful than a 200 f2) Besides knowing what you need and being able to afford it are two different things, at least for most of us.

[liza]

More like the 85 f1.2.

Not if you're shooting basketball. :)

[mbze430]

putting the 12mm + 25mm extension tube on the 70-200 IS, and using the IS in Macro photography :)

[piku]

Can anyone go into the IS modes and RL examples they had using those, especially concerts... TIA

[Tapeman]

You don't stop action with aperture, you do it with shutter speed. A larger aperture allows you to use a faster shutter speed.

[MALI]

I just assumed that anyone trying to stop action would a) obviously use the lens wide open, b) then they'd use the lowest ISO that gave them: c) the minimum shutterspeed for shooting that particular event. And there are many many times when ISO 3200 @ f2.8 will NOT give you enough shutterspeed to freeze action and it all depends on the light.

I do not understand this?

To stop action, you would use the "lowest" ISO? I thought just the opposite.

To stop action, you would use "minimum" shutter speed. I thought just the opposite.

And there are "many, many" times a whopping ISO 3200 and wide open f2.8 will not freeze action??? What are those times?

These numbers are like the limits of the technology today and you say there are many many times these will not help you?

I really would like to know what kind of action you were trying to stop. Somebody running in pitch darkness at night?

As far as that goes f2.8 isn't all that fast.

Well, it is not as fast as, say, 1.8 but it is fast nevertheless. With the zooms, it is as fast as it gets. I do not get your point.

Speed tends to be relative depending on the focal length, with a 600 mm lens being amazingly fast at f4.

This is the first time I am hearing this; speed is relative to the focal length?? So, 600mm at f4 is faster than 200mm at f2.8? Are you sure you did not get confused about all this?

MALI

[DaveG]

I do not understand this?

To stop action, you would use the "lowest" ISO? I thought just the opposite.

To stop action, you would use "minimum" shutter speed. I thought just the opposite.

And there are "many, many" times a whopping ISO 3200 and wide open f2.8 will not freeze action??? What are those times?

These numbers are like the limits of the technology today and you say there are many many times these will not help you?

I really would like to know what kind of action you were trying to stop. Somebody running in pitch darkness at night?



Well, it is not as fast as, say, 1.8 but it is fast nevertheless. With the zooms, it is as fast as it gets. I do not get your point.



This is the first time I am hearing this; speed is relative to the focal length?? So, 600mm at f4 is faster than 200mm at f2.8? Are you sure you did not get confused about all this?

MALI

"To stop action, you would use the "lowest" ISO? I thought just the opposite."

Sorry maybe my sentence wasn't clear. First I'd use the lens wide open, and that's why god made f2.8 L series lenses. Then I'd use the LOWEST, yes lowest ISO that gave me enough shutterspeed to freeze the action. For example I'd use ISO 400 if there was enough light so I could shoot football at 1/1000 @ f2.8. I could go to 1/2000 if I used ISO 800 but the noise would be more of a problem at ISO 800 than the benefit of 1/2000 over 1/1000. Now if I was shooting basketball inside and ISO 400 gave me 1/125 @ f2.8 then I'd go up two stops in ISO - to ISO 1600 - in order to get 1/500 of a second which I consider to be a minimum shutterspeed for most sports. Darn the noise of ISO 1600, having a frozen image is much more important. But when I don't have to go to a high ISO I won't.

"To stop action, you would use "minimum" shutter speed. I thought just the opposite."

I meant the "minimum" shutterspeed that still froze the action, which is always my # one priority. Once again if I'm shooting football on a bright sunny day I'm not going to use 1/8000 with ISO 1600 and f2.8, just because I can. I figure that anything higher than 1/1000 is not going to make much difference and then a lower ISO and possibly a smaller aperture would be a better choice.

"And there are "many, many" times a whopping ISO 3200 and wide open f2.8 will not freeze action. What are those times?"

I used to shoot short course indoor speed skating in this dismal little rink where the exposure was 1/60 @f2 with ISO 3200 (Kodak P3200 a really really bad film). I'd shoot the start (tips of the skates dug into the ice and everyone ready to start) and that would be it. So "the times" are when there's very little light.

"This is the first time I am hearing this; speed is relative to the focal length?? So, 600mm at f4 is faster than 200mm at f2.8? Are you sure you did not get confused about all this?"

No, 2.8 is 2.8. That is unchanged in any focal length. It's just really HARD and expensive to make a long lens as fast as a shorter one.

If you take a 50mm lens with an exit pupil of 25mm (basically the lens wide open) you divide 50 by 25 and get 2. 2 (f2) is the aperture. That's why when you use a 2X teleconverter you lose two stops. (The new focal length is 100. The exit pupil is still 25. 100/25=4. Or f4.) So imagine the diameter of an exit pupil that divides into 600mm and yields 2.8! It would be around 215mm. A 300 f2.8 has a front element of around 120mm. That 600 is HUGE all by itself and it's only an f4.