Image Stabilization with speeds of 1/640

[SamHunter]

I shoot basketball for the school paper and typically use 1/640 at f/2.8. Anyway, I hear mixed opinions about whether the IS helps or hurts at speeds that fast. Opinions?

[DDCSD]

If you don't allow the IS to settle, it can adversely affect the sharpness of your shots. If your shutter fires during that "stutter/jump" that occurs when the IS is spinning up, it can cause your shots to be soft. even at very high shutter speeds.

The IS attempts to counter movement of the lens. If you're moving the lens intentionally, the IS will be working to counter that movement, even though the movement is what you want to be happening.

At speeds of 1/640s at 200mm, there won't be any real benefit to using IS anyways.

[SamHunter]

I appreciate the input.

I like it while looking through the viewfinder but yea sometimes I think it negatively effects photos

[clarence]

I did some tests with my 100-400L IS and found that it was better to just leave I.S. off when shutter speeds were faster than 1/500" or so.

I tend to work the back-button AF on/off quite a bit... not giving the IS the full second that it needs for the stabilizer gyros to spin up.

The rule of thumb is usually 1/zoomlength. You can decide whether to factor in your 40D's 1.6x sensor crop factor or not. But for 200mm, even if you factor in the sensor crop, that's 1/320" seconds. Your 1/640" SS is twice as fast, so IMHO, leave it off.

I know the IS on the 70-200 is a newer generation than the 100-400L, but when I traded my 70-200/4L IS for a 70-200/2.8L non-IS, I was willing to give up the IS because I never use it for sports.

But for low-light, low-motion subjects, IS is valuable... I've done those tests too... I could handhold 200mm at 1/30"... almost impossible for me without IS.

[DDCSD]

I appreciate the input.

I like it while looking through the viewfinder but yea sometimes I think it negatively effects photos


It's not so bad for field sports where you're tracking distant subjects and not moving the lens around much at longer FL's, but I don't think it would be as good when your jerking the lens around like you do (or like I do, at least) for basketball.

[Mike R]

It's not so bad for field sports where you're tracking distant subjects and not moving the lens around much at longer FL's, but I don't think it would be as good when your jerking the lens around like you do (or like I do, at least) for basketball.

Stop waving that thing around and shoot already! :lol:

[DDCSD]

Stop waving that thing around and shoot already! :lol:


:lol::lol:

I think I have ADD. I can't keep focused on one subject for very long before I get bored! :lol:

[Mike R]

:lol::lol:

I think I have ADD. I can't keep focused on one subject for very long before I get bored! :lol:

Is this like forgetting about ProShow? :lol:

[DDCSD]

Is this like forgetting about ProShow? :lol:


Pretty much! :lol:

[DC Fan]

Football at high shutter speeds with a 70-300mm IS USM lens.

http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/10042008b0183.jpg

1/2000.


http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/10112008a0265.jpg

1/1600.


http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/11082008a0058.jpg

1/640.


Image stabilization stays engaged and in mode 1 two-axis stabilization whenever the lens is used.

[vreeke]

no IS for sportsphoto's it is a waste > 500/sec

[AdamLewis]

I leave it on all the time Sam. 70-200, 300, 400...Its always on. Main benefit for me is it stabilizes the viewfinder and helps to keep the camera on target.

[MJPhotos24]

Only lens I use it on is 24-105 when in the commotion and lower shutter speeds - never for game shots, and pretty much everywhere I've seen the same thing - if the shutter is higher than the focal length IS is useless.