Image Stabilization and battery consumption

[RTMiller]

Just got the Canon 70-200mm 2.8L IS lens. What an incredible piece of equipment!
I noticed that when you press the shutter down halfway you can hear (and SEE, wow!) the image stabilization kick in. When you release the shutter button, the IS continues for about a half a second then it shuts off. Is there any information out there about how much battery power IS consumes versus a lens without IS?

[dhbailey]

I have the 75-300 IS USM lens, and I don't notice any serious degradation in battery life using that lens vs. my other lenses which don't have IS. I don't have any empirical tests, but my experience is that my battery isn't drained any faster when I use my IS lens.

[Jim_T]

My 100-400 is the only IS lens I have. It drains the battery noticeably... I get at least 75 less shots.. When I first started using the lens, I initially though my batteries were going south because they weren't lasting as long :)

[samdring]

My 100-400 is the only IS lens I have. It drains the battery noticeably... I get at least 75 less shots.. When I first started using the lens, I initially though my batteries were going south because they weren't lasting as long :)


Never thought about this before but I suppose that larger the elements the bigger the battery drain for IS ??

[lomond]

I have three IS lenses and, of course, it must be an extra drain on the battery.
Yet I've managed on (don't laugh) only one battery up until recently and never had a problem.
To be fair I tend to be conservative on the shots I take, although I do tend to " chimp" a bit.

So, for me, a fully charged battery will last me all day, but it makes sense to have a spare.

[tbfoto]

I use my 28-135IS all the time and have never "run out" of power from using it versus using other lenses for other events.


tbfoto

[Alan Neilson]

same as tbfofo, I have a 28-135mm and have the IS switched nearly all the time when it is on the camera and haven't noticed any battery drain, might just be with the longer lens.!

[Twist]

I was wondering this too. I just got my 28-135 IS yesterday... Havent had a real chance to play with it yet. I guess I need to make another order for my filter and another battery just in case cause we are going to Vegas in a few weeks.

[digitalmono]

Just got the Canon 70-200mm 2.8L IS lens. What an incredible piece of equipment!
I noticed that when you press the shutter down halfway you can hear (and SEE, wow!) the image stabilization kick in. When you release the shutter button, the IS continues for about a half a second then it shuts off. Is there any information out there about how much battery power IS consumes versus a lens without IS?

First of all, Welcome to the happy owner's club!

There's a small increase in battery consumption when the IS is ON. But you can save some power to give to the IS with just minor adjustments in your shooting style (if you are the type of shooter that keeps testing your servo focus , loves that annoying beeps from the focus lock and/or spend more time with your eyes on the LCD screen than the viewfinder). Even if you already knows (and use)all the power saving techniques, the IS doesn't eats more than 10% of your battery.

Oops! This is my opinion for the MkII. The 300D needs the second battery (battery grip) if you are going for a long time shooting!

[pturton]

From the Canon EF 70-200mm L IS manual p.E-9

"If the image stabilizer is used for about 10 seconds for each shot, the battery life will be reduced by about 20%."

[mjordan]

Yes, I have both the 70-200 2.8L IS and 100-400 4.5/5.6L IS and it does shorten the battery life as compared to shooting with my 24-70 2.8L or my 70-200 4.0L lenses. How much depends on a lot of things besides just using the IS though. It's well worth the extra batteries I carry with me, that's for sure.

Mike

[digitalmono]

From the Canon EF 70-200mm L IS manual p.E-9

"If the image stabilizer is used for about 10 seconds for each shot, the battery life will be reduced by about 20%."

That's the LENS manual.
I think the increase of consumption is about 10% on the MkII and 30% on the 300D. The guys at Canon found the same and printed the average on the manual!LOL

[pturton]

digitalmono,
<The guys at Canon found the same and printed the average on the manual!LOL>

Actually the manual I have, was published in 2001. The reference in the manual refers to EOS cameras. So the 'average' stated here is for forward compatibility I suppose :)