To IS or not to IS - That's the question

[Sniper]

Hi!

I know this is a common "problem" (did not found a better word) for people with DSLR's, decideing among those nice, white lenses.
I have desided for the 70-200 2.8. BUT SHOULD I BUY IT WITH OUR WITHOUT IS!? Thats the "problem".

Ofcourse it would be nice with IS, but it's 1000 EURO extra. Should I buy a great carbon tripod and a macro lens for that 100 EURO insted!?

What is your experience? Do you people without the IS miss it a lot? I guess that you who have the IS don't regret your choise, or!?

Just want a lots of opinions.

Anders

[jmublueduck]

- buy the IS version... no question. it's SO worth it.
- w/ any leftover, buy a rock-solid, yet cheaper tripod than a carbon fiber one (e.g the bogen 3021pro instead of a gitzo).

...like you need to save a pound or two anyway w/ a heavy 70-200 & a heavy DSLR.

just my $0.02.

[Sniper]

I really don't mind carrying the extra weight of an metal tripod, but I just LOVE the look of carbone.. :)

Thanks for your opinion. So you are very happy with your IS version of this lens? I guess everyone is who owns it. But what about the length of life for the IS mechanism? I have understood that it is optically stabilised, but ofcourse it is electronic too in some way. Does it demand a repair every five years for the rest of the lens's life time? Maybe no one knows yet!?

Still, I think I will go for the IS. I know myself that well and I would blame myself everytime I have to delete a picture that I know would have been great if I had the IS version.

But still I would like to have more opinions and hear of your experiences.

Anders

[Sniper]

Big misstake! I wrote that the IS version were 100 EURO (have changed that now) more that the non IS. It should ofcourse be 1000 EURO. If it were just 100 i would have bought it already.. :)

Sorry!

Anders

[Sniper]

And another thing.

I saw that the 70-200 L IS costs around 1.600 US $. In Sweden we have to pay (the equivalent amount) 2.900 US $ for that lens. I think that sucks big time.

Time for a trip to the States perhapes......

Anders

[Hawkeye12]

sniper wrote:
And another thing.

I saw that the 70-200 L IS costs around 1.600 US $. In Sweden we have to pay (the equivalent amount) 2.900 US $ for that lens. I think that sucks big time.

Time for a trip to the States perhapes......

Anders

why not just order from B&H here in the states?

[Phil Hall]

Go with the IS and forget a tripod.


Phiul Hall

Santa Ynez, CA

[Sniper]

Hawkeye12

Yes, that's a thought. Ordering via Internet. I'll check it out.

Phil Hall

I need a tripod anyway, for the nightshots. But maybe I will have a metal one instead of the carbon. But I LOVE the look of them..... :)


Thanks for your inputs, keep posting opinions

Anders

[Hawkeye12]

here ya go;
http://www.bhphotovideo.com

[Sheila]

Hi Anders

I am about to buy the EF 300 f/4 IS L from a friend. These two shots were taken from their verandah overlooking Pittwater where we live. It shows what an amazing lens this 300 IS is. I hasten to add that when I posted this on Fred Miranda's site, folk said that the EF300 non-IS was an excellent lens too.

http://www.shutterfreaks.com/albums/album85/Sana_for_web.jpg

and a heavy crop
http://www.shutterfreaks.com/albums/album85/Sana_heavy_crop_for_web.jpg

I am certainly sold on this lens. Shots I have taken since are super sharp. Its a large fairly heavy lens but does not need a tripod.

Cheers
Sheila

[gsrossano]

Whether IS is worth 1000 Euros depends upon what you are shooting. For daylight outdoors when you can shoot at 1/250 or faster, I don't see the value in it. If your subject is moving quickly (like in sports photography) and you need 1/250 or faster shutter to eliminate motion blur it also doesn't get you anything. Also keep in mind that all the Canon IS designs are LESS sharp than the non-IS designs they replace.

If you shoot in dim light, with your subject not moving too fast so a shutter speed of longer than 1/250 is adequate, and the pictures you capture are worth 1000 Euros to you spend the money. Otherwise, buy a really good tripod instead.

[jmublueduck]

gsrossano wrote:
Also keep in mind that all the Canon IS designs are LESS sharp than the non-IS designs they replace..

can you support this claim? I've heard nothing of the sort, esp. re: the 70-200.

[gsrossano]

Compare the MTF curves for each design. Also look at the image quality comparisons that can be found on several photo/lens sites that do lens tests and reports.

[50/1.4]

One thing to think about is battery consumption, they suck power. I have the 75-300 IS that I usually have mounted on a Rebel X with the BP-8 Battery pack. I use NiCads. Gsrossano - I think your argument has merit if we are talking about tripod mounted lenses. In the more common world of hand held photography, the MTF charts become less relevant. The reduction of hand held blur often supercedes inherent lens sharpness. Specifically, my 75-300IS @200mm will often outperform a 200/2.8L in terms of picture sharpness even when shot at the "safe" speed of 1/250 sec. The difference becomes even larger as the speed gets longer. Lens sharpness is overcome by blur due to movement.

[gsrossano]

True enough about the trade off between intrinsic resolution, hand held blur and motion blur. The crossover shutter speed where you no longer are limited by the intrinsic resolution of the lens will depend on the photographer and the subject. Since I shoot sports I typically use shutter speeds of 1/350 or faster. I also find I can steadily hand hold my 300/2.8 and shoot as slow as 1/250. Other people will have other results. Also, I generally shoot with a pole too and can work with even slower speeds if the subject will allow it. So for me the intrinsic resolution of the lens is at the top of my list, then I go with the shutter speed I need to eliminate subject blur, and use the pole to eliminate (most) hand held blur.

But to reiterate them main point. Whether IS is of value depends on what you shoot and how you shoot it. No tool (lens, body, etc) is right for every situation and every photographer. W all have to decide what works best for our own situation.