Sports photography L series Lens: About to pull trigger

[Daffunda]

Canon EF-L f/2.8 70-200mm USM IS or NO IS.

I have seen the IS version at a store, and it was heavy. :confused:

My plan is to use this lens mostly for indoor/outdoor sports photography, gymnastics, track and field (outside/inside) and basketball, lacrosse, field hocky.....

I'm leaning towards the non IS version because,

1. The lens is heavy, and I probably will get a monopod.

2. I won't be shooting at slow shutter speeds, less than 1/250.

Although my only concern is when I am taking pictures of athletes just standing, then I think IS may become useful.......

So you sports photographers out there, what are your opinions. :D

[zerovision]

IS all the way!!!!! I have the 70-20mm f/2.8 lens w/o IS, if I could change it I would. I don't know what the weight difference is, but I feel I could live with it. Especially with a monopod. I shoot indoor dog sports and the light is awful, causing me to go more with the 85mm f/1.2 just to get enough light and freeze the action, but I see other people with the IS option producing sharper images and shooting the same settings.

I may be wrong and I'm only one opinion, but if you decide to go w/o IS, let me know, I might sell you mine.

Hope this helps. Have a great weekend.

[royv]

I'd have to disagree. Get the non-IS, a good monopod, ballhead and save some cash. If you regularly shoot basketball you might want to spend the extra cash you've saved in a good prime like the 85/1.8....as you know, IS isn't gonna stop the action, just the camera shake.

[carpenter]

No real need for the IS for that type of shooting. If the athletes are just standing and you are still using a high shutter speed the Is isn't going to matter anyway. Maybe if you were shooting indoor or low light and you wanted to lower the ISO for quality and had to use a slow shutter it would help, but for sports in general if you have any concern with using the extra money for something else you don't need IS.

[crazyskillz07]

I believe that the weight difference between the two is something like 3 ounces. The question you should be asking is if you will ever bee shooting other events. Like weddings. If you think it is a possibility get the IS so you won't have to upgrade later. Also remember that IS mode two helps with panning. If your shooting motorsports it will come in handy.

[dave kadolph]

It depends on what other lenses you have in your collection and your budget.

I decided to go non IS and buy an 85 1.8 and a 50 1.4 with the difference.

With tradition stick and ball sports if I can't get enough shutter speed it's time to either switch to a fast prime or pack it up and go home--IS won't help at all with blur related to the subject moving.

My .02 -- Your mileage may vary.

BTW--Welcome to the neighborhood.

[SkipD]

While I agree that IS isn't needed for sports photography per se, but most photographers I know get into different situations from time to time where the IS would be very welcome.

I know that I really appreciate the fact that I chose the 70-200 f/2.8L IS even though I cannot always benefit from having the IS. There are times that I certainly do.

[DC Fan]

Panning - and the IS lens' "mode 2," vertical-only stabilization - is the real-world sports advantage of the IS version of the 70-200mm F/2.8.

[Zivnuska]

While I agree that IS isn't needed for sports photography per se, but most photographers I know get into different situations from time to time where the IS would be very welcome.

I know that I really appreciate the fact that I chose the 70-200 f/2.8L IS even though I cannot always benefit from having the IS. There are times that I certainly do.

Yes! That zoom is quite versatile when the IS is included.

The lens is hand holdable for the average guy. You may prefer the monopod for some situations but it is not required.

[Lowner]

I went the non IS route when I got mine in 2005, because reviews then claimed better figures. But I've been asking myself whether it was the right choice ever since.

Now I've had a chance to get used to my 100-400L IS, my first IS lens ever, I'm still not sure! I assumed this would answer the question immediately!

So the truth is, it probably makes little difference unless you want to hand-hold at less than 1/200s, which as a confirmed tripod user, I never do.

[MaDProFF]

Who says you are going to be doing that sort of shooting all the time, IS for me, weight is not an issue, IS is a fantastic tool to have on your lens especially for panning and low light work.
You will soon get used to the weight, and personally using a monopod is restrictive

[MaDProFF]

I went the non IS route when I got mine in 2005, because reviews then claimed better figures. But I've been asking myself whether it was the right choice ever since.

Now I've had a chance to get used to my 100-400L IS, my first IS lens ever, I'm still not sure! I assumed this would answer the question immediately!

So the truth is, it probably makes little difference unless you want to hand-hold at less than 1/200s, which as a confirmed tripod user, I never do.

I have pin sharp hand held shots with my 100-400 at 1/40 up with IS, shots that I would not have got with non IS, and shots I could not have used a monopod or tripod, I agree it is all to his/her own, but having it gives you all the options if you want to try your hand at shooting somthing else

[DennisE]

If you have IS then you have the choice to turn it off for sports. If you dont have IS then you cannot turn it on if you require it. I have IS and manage to carry it around no problem although I must admit it does get heavy after a while but IMHO do really think its the way to go.

[Daffunda]

Thanks for all your reply guys.

I've also been thinking about supporting the local mom and pops store and shelling out 1999+tax for one, or just going to bhphoto and paying 1650 + shipping. The local mom and pops store said that they can't match the online retailers price, or even come close to it...

Out the door price difference of 400 dollars seems way too much.....

Also BH has the IMPORTED ones sold out, which is 50 dollars cheaper, but the domestic ones are in stock, which is 50 dollars more..... I suppose these lenses sold out due to the olympics fever?

I'm thinking that there is no difference in quality?

[nicksan]

If you can afford to buy the IS version, I would just get it and be done with it.
Supporting the Mom and Pop shop is nice and everything, but not at the cost of $400.

That's your hard earned cash. Use it wisely. Buy from B&H.

[Mr B Pix]

I shoot ALOT of sports. Both indoor (gymnastics and basketball) and outdoor (soccer and swimming). I agree that you don't necessarily need IS given the faster shutter speeds you will be shooting.

However, I also shoot ALOT of other stuff too - including family, parks, travel, parties, picnics, etc. The fact is you never know when you may need/want the IS. It sure is nice knowing that I've always got it when I need/want it. Personally, I wouldn't buy a 70-200 lens without IS. All of the longer primes (except the 200/2.8 and 400/5.6) come in the IS only flavor. The 300/2.8 and 400/2.8 are some of the favorites of the pro sports shooters (and they have IS).

I also agree with some of the others in that you may want to look at the 85/1.8 and 135/2.0 for indoor sports. The 135/2.0 is at the top of my wish list.

[MT Stringer]

I did just as you. I couldn't make up my mind. I asked for help and got a lot of the same answers just like the ones posted here. I finally ponied up and bought the IS version.

So far, I've been real happy with it. I shoot mostly sports, but not always.

The pic of my "neighbor" was shot at 1/40 second, handheld. The softball shot was handheld also. Both were shot through the fence! :-)

I really like this lens.
Mike

[flickserve]

While I agree that IS isn't needed for sports photography per se, but most photographers I know get into different situations from time to time where the IS would be very welcome.

I know that I really appreciate the fact that I chose the 70-200 f/2.8L IS even though I cannot always benefit from having the IS. There are times that I certainly do.That's me. I've sold my nonIS. Need to get the 2.8IS version this week sometime. I need it for other times when I'm not shooting sports.