View Full Version : IS (or not) primarily sports 70-200/2.8L
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 17:06
Almost every sports shooter that I've talked to has said to not waste my money on IS for this lens and that it may actually slow the AF a bit when shooting action. What would you do since I plan to keep this lens a long time and use it on my 1D? This will be my bread and butter lens for all varieties of sports and often in low light w/o flash. Thanks
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 17:12
When in doubt, get the IS. If you don't, someday I know you're gonna wish you did, if you can afford it. You can always turn it off if you have it, but you can't turn it on if you buy the more cost-saving version. Just my two cents.
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 17:17
If you can afford it, go for it. I would love to have IS in all my lenses, but being on a budget I cannot justify the extra money. I also like how IS lenses have made their out of date non IS counterparts much cheaper. If there is any slow in AF it will not be noticeable. Plus your using a camera with blazing fast AF, no need to worry.
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 17:42
I recently switched lenses with a guy to try out the non IS version. I was immediately surprised by its weight difference.
If you can, hold them both before deciding. As ghms421 points out the non IS are less expensive.
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 20:07
options are good to have
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 20:36
I had the non IS for years. A great lens, especially for sports. Last year I got the IS version. For me there are plenty of times that I'm glad I have the IS. If all you shoot is sports you won't miss the IS.
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 20:42
I shoot alot of sports, football, soccer, etc and usually do it with the 300/f4 during the day and the 200/f2.8 at night. I also have the Sigma 70-200 and am tempted to trade both or sell both to get the 70-200 IS and use it for night sports.
As everyone said, IS is not need for sports but it's really nice to have.
8th of February 2007 (Thu), 20:43
you should definitly get the IS version, and for a reason that is different than you might think. You said u have the 1D, and shoot sports, so, although we could argue for a long time whether or not IS is importnat, weather sealing should be very important. the IS version is weather sealed, the non IS is NOT weather sealed, so i definitly would recommend saving up for the IS.
9th of February 2007 (Fri), 20:24
I think the reason your fellow sports shooters have told you to skip the IS is that you generally need fast shutter speeds to freeze motion, so having an IS that allows for slower shutter speeds won't help freeze the action. So you need speed/fast lenses to freeze action, especially in low light situations. It may take a split second for the IS to settle in as well, so if you want the IS to be ready to fire, you have to half press the shutter to get the IS gyroscope moving. This really sucks up battery power. Lastly the IS lens weighs more, I don't know if this will be a factor for you or not.
IS would be helpful for any sports where you pan to show motion though, and seeing as you have a 1D series, the IS has weather sealing and would help prevent water damage as the non IS does not have weather sealing.
9th of February 2007 (Fri), 20:48
Wow! I mistakenly assumed that ALL of the 'L' glass was weather sealed!! The weather sealing on the IS version will definitely weigh heavily on my decision. When I shoot motocross (MX) it's often extremely dusty and I'm right in the middle of it having to often cover the camera with my shirt it's so bad... Thanks so much to all the advice and recommendations - I really appreciate it.
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.