Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 13 Apr 2007 (Friday) 15:15
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Difference between IS and non IS lens?

 
onedownfiveup
Senior Member
onedownfiveup's Avatar
306 posts
Joined Nov 2005
Overland Park, KS
Apr 13, 2007 15:15 |  #1

I've tried to search and can't find what the difference is.


Canon 20D | Canon PowerShot A520 | Canon 200EG Deluxe Backpack | 18-55mm Kit Lens | EF 50mm f1.8 | 2 Vivitar 285HV's | 2 Pocket Wizard Plus II | 2 8' Light Stands and Flash Brackets| 2 Impact 32" White with Black Removable Backing Umbrella's

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Roy ­ Mathers
I am Spartacus!
Roy Mathers's Avatar
33,457 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Dec 2006
Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
Apr 13, 2007 15:22 |  #2

One has image stabilisation, the other doesn't. Other than that, I'm not sure what the question means.




LOG IN TO REPLY
inthedeck
Cream of the Crop
inthedeck's Avatar
11,184 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Joined Sep 2006
St. Augustine, Florida
Apr 13, 2007 15:43 |  #3

What Roy said. Though, for some reason, some people say that the 300 f4L non-is has slightly better image quality than the 300 f4l IS. Beyond me, as the 300 f4L non-is is no longer made.


MCSquared (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link)
My name: Manish.

LOG IN TO REPLY
D.C.
Goldmember
1,150 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Montana
Apr 13, 2007 15:52 |  #4

About $500!!!


Duane
7D, 430EX,10-22, 100 Macro, 100-400, 24-105, 500 F/4 IS

My Galleryexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
thekid24
pro-zack-lee
thekid24's Avatar
8,545 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Oklahoma City,OK
Apr 13, 2007 15:58 |  #5

here is a pretty nice explanation http://web.canon.jp/Im​aging/lens/index.htmlexternal link


flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
onedownfiveup
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
onedownfiveup's Avatar
306 posts
Joined Nov 2005
Overland Park, KS
Apr 13, 2007 16:45 |  #6

D.C. wrote in post #3036277external link
About $500!!!

I just noticed that.


Thanks guys!


Canon 20D | Canon PowerShot A520 | Canon 200EG Deluxe Backpack | 18-55mm Kit Lens | EF 50mm f1.8 | 2 Vivitar 285HV's | 2 Pocket Wizard Plus II | 2 8' Light Stands and Flash Brackets| 2 Impact 32" White with Black Removable Backing Umbrella's

LOG IN TO REPLY
shaneotool
Member
211 posts
Joined Aug 2006
arkansas
Apr 13, 2007 16:55 |  #7

D.C. wrote in post #3036277external link
About $500!!!

I guess if they took the IS out of my 70-300IS, it would be worth about as much as a KFC snacker.




LOG IN TO REPLY
wcl4
Senior Member
711 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Old Greenwich CT
Apr 13, 2007 17:27 |  #8

I never quite understood why IS varies in cost on different lenses. On the 70-200 f2.8, the IS makes that lens $600 more than the non IS version, around $450 on the 70-200 f4, and yet the 70-300 IS goes for ~$500. Does that mean the glass is only worth $100? $200? Nothing?


WILLIAM LEE

LOG IN TO REPLY
basroil
Cream of the Crop
basroil's Avatar
8,015 posts
Joined Mar 2006
STL/Clayton, MO| NJ
Apr 13, 2007 17:37 |  #9

inthedeck wrote in post #3036220external link
What Roy said. Though, for some reason, some people say that the 300 f4L non-is has slightly better image quality than the 300 f4l IS. Beyond me, as the 300 f4L non-is is no longer made.

not when the IS is off. when IS is off, the two versions have almost identical results. IS version of lenses will have about 2 extra elements unless the IS and non-IS are completely different designs (usually not the case)

wcl4 wrote in post #3036736external link
I never quite understood why IS varies in cost on different lenses. On the 70-200 f2.8, the IS makes that lens $600 more than the non IS version, around $450 on the 70-200 f4, and yet the 70-300 IS goes for ~$500. Does that mean the glass is only worth $100? $200? Nothing?

the size of the IS elements, gyros, and servos each have very high size to cost ratios, bigger=much more expensive


I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
wcl4
Senior Member
711 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Old Greenwich CT
Apr 13, 2007 17:45 |  #10

Thanks for the answer to the IS cost question. Not knowing anything about the mechanics of the technology, I would think the amount of stabilization a telephoto lens needs would be less than on a shorter length lens since minute amounts of vibrations are amplified by the focal length of the telephoto lens.


WILLIAM LEE

LOG IN TO REPLY
inthedeck
Cream of the Crop
inthedeck's Avatar
11,184 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Joined Sep 2006
St. Augustine, Florida
Apr 13, 2007 19:05 |  #11

basroil wrote in post #3036778external link
when IS is off, the two versions have almost identical results.

Almost is not completely. Close, but no cigar.

I may never know, as I don't own the 300 prime with no IS. Maybe when a 400 5.6L IS comes out, if ever, I can compare the current 400 5.6L with one that does have IS. That would be cool...


MCSquared (external link) on Flickr
MCSquared Photography (external link)
My name: Manish.

LOG IN TO REPLY
runninmann
what the heck do I know?
runninmann's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
Michigan-U.S.A.
Apr 13, 2007 19:15 |  #12

wcl4 wrote in post #3036813external link
Thanks for the answer to the IS cost question. Not knowing anything about the mechanics of the technology, I would think the amount of stabilization a telephoto lens needs would be less than on a shorter length lens since minute amounts of vibrations are amplified by the focal length of the telephoto lens.

Is this really what you meant to say? I would expect the opposite to be true.


My Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

12,891 views & 0 likes for this thread
Difference between IS and non IS lens?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00102 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is leshiy2045
869 guests, 658 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 5577, that happened on Mar 02, 2016