Amazing - IS

[Rob612]

Really bored and depressed for family problems, this morning I resold my 70-200 2.8 and bought the IS version.

I knew that IS is a really good thing, but I never tought it was so great, here two quick pics (100% crop, no PP) taken @200mm f/14, 1/25 with and without the IS.

Not a big deal to understand which one is which... :D I must say that the financial effort is definitely worth !

http://www.digitalpics.it/forumlnk/no_is.jpg



http://www.digitalpics.it/forumlnk/is.jpg

[tim]

Wow! Glad I bought the IS version :)

[Rob612]

Wow! Glad I bought the IS version :)

Yep ! The best money I could spend on basically the same lens. I loved my older 70-200, but IS is really amazing. Can't wait to go out and try it more extensively (those two pics were taken out of my window... nothig to see, actually, but the street signs were right for the test). I must admit that I am normally not used to shoot to 1/25 handheld with a 200 mm., but now that I know its possible... a whole new world is opening. Gotta try with the 2x extender @400...

[Cadwell]

I.S. is something I'm personally not too keen on. It's of limited benefit to me as a sports photographer (it does nothing to stop subject motion blur so I need to keep the shutter speed up anyway) and I've just had one of my L series zooms out of comission for 10 and half weeks due to it's I.S. mechanism failing... Given the choice between an I.S. and non I.S. version of a lens, I'd probably take the non-I.S.

[Rob612]

Surely its a matter of needs, I do not do too much of sports, but I do a lot of wildlife and other basically static stuff, and IS will be a great help. I agree with you that IS for sports is probably a wrong choice.

I imagine that for shooting flying birds, I can just turn the IS off.

[Penance]

mmm Rome, i'll be back there in september:D

Congrats on the lens.

[Cadwell]

Surely its a matter of needs, I do not do too much of sports, but I do a lot of wildlife and other basically static stuff, and IS will be a great help. I agree with you that IS for sports is probably a wrong choice.

I imagine that for shooting flying birds, I can just turn the IS off.

Oh indeed, for some applications I.S. is undoubtedly useful. For me, it's an unecessary complication. Something that's of little use for what I do, but that can go wrong and cause me problems.

[kram]

I know how you feel Rob. I moved from a Sony Mavica that had IS to my Drebel. I was so frustrated the first few weeks coz my hands just couldnt hold a camera steady http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif Never had to practise I guess.

Now I'm tempted to go for the 70-300 DO with the IS than the 70-200 F4. Hmmmmm.... I hate choices, especially expensive ones:confused:

[Rob612]

Something that's of little use for what I do, but that can go wrong and cause me problems.

Anything that is not there, can't broke (Henry Ford) :D

In general, I agree with you. But today in the digital world we have so much things out of our control that can go wrong (and actually do, sometimes) that I am somehow resigned about it :)

Anyway, I agree with you. If you do not need it, its surely not worth the extra money and risk. For me, I think it will work.

[Rob612]

mmm Rome, i'll be back there in september:D

Congrats on the lens.

Don't forget to PM/Email me. A cold one is always available for fellow POTNers.

[Dew]

hee hee - picked mine up last night :):):)
still waiting for my 1.4x MkII to turn up though.... :(

haven't had much play time yet though - and now i'm stuck at work :rolleyes:

[pcasciola]

I shoot lots of sports too, and I still think IS is awesome. Sure, it doesn't help stop fast motion, but not all shots require that. I've used IS with great success during night baseball games, when non-IS lenses over about 100mm would have been practically useless without at least a monopod. IS can also save you in a pinch . Just the other evening I was shooting a little league baseball championship game. Little did I know the trophies were going to be handed out after the game as the sun was setting. Without IS I would have missed a lot of nice shots there.

[SkipD]

After having the 70-200mm f2.8L IS, I won't buy another long lens without IS. I was skeptical in the beginning, but am elated at what the IS can do for me. I shoot a mix of static and action, so IS isn't always useful. When shooting static subjects, though, it's a fantastic tool.

[ghocking]

Having not been below 1/125 yet with mine, I will have to try at lower speeds. I doubt it will do me much good, getting on in age and bought just for the IS.

Wish my 24-70 had IS as well with being a hevy lens.

[Rob612]

Having not been below 1/125 yet with mine, I will have to try at lower speeds. I doubt it will do me much good, getting on in age and bought just for the IS.

Wish my 24-70 had IS as well with being a hevy lens.

Give it a try. I have not done extensive tests yet, but I think that you can have some nice surprises.

[Jack W.]

I also love IS.
I'm 56, and because of a herniated disc in my neck, which I've had for over 30 years, I have some weakness in my left arm. Not drastic, but a bit tough to hold a camera steady (I think some light but frequent excersize will help).
Anyway, I now have the 17-85IS, the Sigma 80-400OS, and I just got the 300 f/4 L IS.
I might be able to use the 17-85 without IS (haven't tried yet), but no way with the 300, and absolutely no way with the Sigma.
If there was an IS version of my 10-22, I would have bought it. LOL
Jack

[Jon Arno]

I.S. is something I'm personally not too keen on. It's of limited benefit to me as a sports photographer (it does nothing to stop subject motion blur so I need to keep the shutter speed up anyway) and I've just had one of my L series zooms out of comission for 10 and half weeks due to it's I.S. mechanism failing... Given the choice between an I.S. and non I.S. version of a lens, I'd probably take the non-I.S.

IS doesn't get rid of motion blur, but the photographers movement.

[Cadwell]

IS doesn't get rid of motion blur, but the photographers movement.

Thanks for confirming that for me, I never would have guessed :rolleyes:

[Penance]

Don't forget to PM/Email me. A cold one is always available for fellow POTNers.

Missed this yesterday.
Will do, we'll be starting off in Pisa, then Florence and finally Rome. Hopeing to get around 4 days in Rome. Need to see the bits we missed last time:)

[condyk]

Missed this yesterday.
Will do, we'll be starting off in Pisa, then Florence and finally Rome. Hopeing to get around 4 days in Rome. Need to see the bits we missed last time:)

Judging from that first picture you'll need to be careful of the Coffee you get in Italy.

[Rob612]

Eventually, its me with Parkinson, not the lens :D Perhaps, you're right. The pics were taken on purpose in very unstable conditions and without trying my best to hold the camera, to see what the response was. OTOH, it was still a big, heavy 70-200 2.8 plus the 20D with the grip and two batteries inside, in general not what is called a light combo especially at 1/25 :)