Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 10 Nov 2013 (Sunday) 23:02
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Missing out on IS?

 
MrWho
Goldmember
1,201 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Aug 2009
Location: North of Baltimore, MD
     
Nov 10, 2013 23:02 |  #1

Lately I brought up the existence of the 70-200 F4L while on an aviation photography outing. Mentioning the price, I was asked why I didn't purchase the lens instead of the "general purpose" 17-50 VC (which I've now come to see as a specialist lens). I brought up how I needed a low light solution. That may be done away with via the acquisition of primes and a wide angle. The 17-50 isn't leaving though because I still need a museum lens.

70-200 F4L (and later with a 1.4 TC) looks like a solid proposition. I use my 55-250 fairly regularly and will end up keeping it for telephoto work when IS is needed. I'm left wondering specifically on this lens, is the lack of IS going to hurt? Aviation, transport, and zoo photography will be the main uses, not much of which happens at night. About as low light as I am going to get would likely be at the elephant pen at the zoo. Most of my aviation photography takes place around f/11 with shutter speeds rarely dipping below 1/250 at around IS 200-400.

Also, because of price, I'm assuming that the non-IS version is more common in the wild among non-pro photogs? Is it worth the 650 or so USD or will the 55-250 STM fit the bill a little better?

Thanks in advance for all replies!


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Nov 10, 2013 23:37 |  #2

Try an experiment tomorrow. Put on your 55-250 and switch off IS. See how you like it, or can handle it. In your shoes, i think i would stick with the EF-S 55-250. Now, if you are willing to spend more on the 70-200/4 IS, then i would buy that.


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 614
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Nov 10, 2013 23:46 |  #3

So long as your aviation photograph is mainly jets and not propellor driven aircraft, then IS is generally not needed there. For prop planes, it's a wonderful tool for blurring the prop.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Apr 2012
     
Nov 11, 2013 00:30 |  #4

On the bodies you have, you will not need IS as long as you stay at a shutter speed of at least 1/320. Anything lower and you are risking shaking in your photos.


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,871 posts
Gallery: 2028 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 12297
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Nov 11, 2013 09:04 |  #5

MrWho wrote in post #16441224 (external link)
Lately I brought up the existence of the 70-200 F4L while on an aviation photography outing. Mentioning the price, I was asked why I didn't purchase the lens instead of the "general purpose" 17-50 VC (which I've now come to see as a specialist lens). I brought up how I needed a low light solution. That may be done away with via the acquisition of primes and a wide angle. The 17-50 isn't leaving though because I still need a museum lens.

70-200 F4L (and later with a 1.4 TC) looks like a solid proposition. I use my 55-250 fairly regularly and will end up keeping it for telephoto work when IS is needed. I'm left wondering specifically on this lens, is the lack of IS going to hurt? Aviation, transport, and zoo photography will be the main uses, not much of which happens at night. About as low light as I am going to get would likely be at the elephant pen at the zoo. Most of my aviation photography takes place around f/11 with shutter speeds rarely dipping below 1/250 at around IS 200-400.

Also, because of price, I'm assuming that the non-IS version is more common in the wild among non-pro photogs? Is it worth the 650 or so USD or will the 55-250 STM fit the bill a little better?

Thanks in advance for all replies!

Heya,

I don't think you're missing out on IS. Not at that range and shutter speed, in day light.

But it depends on what you want to achieve in your photos and what situations you want to keep shooting in.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotoGeek
Goldmember
1,120 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Jan 2006
     
Nov 11, 2013 10:47 |  #6

I own both the 55-250 and the 70-200 f2.8 (non-IS). The 70-200 is a far better lens in terms of build, IQ, speed of focus, and everything else.

I have not used the 70-200 f4 versions though.


1DX, 1DIII, lenses, flashes, wires and stuff
http://jimlanterphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snakeneck
Senior Member
Avatar
311 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2013
     
Nov 13, 2013 20:37 |  #7

Haven't you ever wondered.....why Canon puts IS on lower end lenses....and not the expensive ones.....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Corbeau
Senior Member
Avatar
377 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Ottawa, Ont, Great White North
     
Nov 13, 2013 21:24 |  #8

... owners of expensive lenses use tripods?


Look and think before opening the shutter. The heart and mind are the true lens of the camera. -- Yousuf Karsh

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dfbovey
Goldmember
1,602 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Mar 2011
     
Nov 13, 2013 21:35 |  #9

Whether you need IS or not depends on how and what you'd be shooting. I don't ever notice that my 400 f/5.6L doesn't have IS, because I'm usually shooting at high shutter speeds (1600 or more) hand held. And if you use a tripod or monopod the IS is not desirable.

If I had to choose between the 55-250 or any version of the 70-200, I'd choose the L glass every time. The 55-250 is a nice starter lens and for the money is good quality but I was never a fan of the variable aperture or the cheap plastic build.

I'd go with the 70-200 without flinching.

snakeneck wrote in post #16449959 (external link)
Haven't you ever wondered.....why Canon puts IS on lower end lenses....and not the expensive ones.....

They make non-IS lenses to give people a price point to be able to afford superior lenses that may not have all the features. Kinda like buying a luxury car without leather seats or power windows. There are versions of the 70-200 with IS, and they are much more expensive than the versions without.


Flickr (external link)
Canon 1D markIV - Canon 1D markIII - Canon 6D
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L - Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L - Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS - Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L - Canon EF 500mm f/4L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snakeneck
Senior Member
Avatar
311 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2013
     
Nov 13, 2013 22:38 |  #10

There are a few Canon 70-200 f4 non is in the seller forum.....saw one for $495.00.........I also owned that lens...my first L glass....it is sharp....but I finally moved up to the big dog 2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OneJZsupra
Goldmember
Avatar
2,378 posts
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Guam
     
Nov 14, 2013 04:02 |  #11

snakeneck wrote in post #16449959 (external link)
Haven't you ever wondered.....why Canon puts IS on lower end lenses....and not the expensive ones.....

Tell that to my 300 2.8 lens.... Or the other countless higher end lens with IS.


Gear List | Feed Back | My Site (external link)
YN RF-603 O-ring solution


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Radders
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,017 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Oct 2009
Location: UK
     
Nov 20, 2013 05:00 |  #12

If you can rent the lens to try, then do that. It's the only way you will know, as everyone takes photos differently.

I use a non-OS Bigma for airshows & Aviation in general with no issues what so ever.

I also shoot between 1/80th - 1/1000th mainly too..

One of my recent shots taken at 1/125th handheld @ 440mm

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3703/10157316466_ca5426aa63_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …04637344@N05/10​157316466/  (external link)
ZK-KCE coming in steep at Hinton. (external link) by Totallyrad.co.uk (external link), on Flickr

| 1DII | 7D | 60D | 6D | 100 2.8 | 50mm 1.4 | 11-16 2.8 | 24-105 4 | 70-300 IS USM |
Totallyrad.co.uk (external link) | Airplane-Pictures.net (external link) |Facebook Page (external link) | Russianplanes.net (external link)Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LeeRatters
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,978 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5938
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Bristol, UK
     
Nov 20, 2013 05:15 |  #13

snakeneck wrote in post #16449959 (external link)
Haven't you ever wondered.....why Canon puts IS on lower end lenses....and not the expensive ones.....

:lol: :lol:


>> Flickr << (external link)


>> Instagram<< (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Nov 20, 2013 06:24 |  #14

IS is kind of overrated, and with the high iso abilities of modern bodies there is not a huge cost to raising ISO to maintain shutter speed.
IS is nice to have but I wouldn't call it essential.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stang67
Senior Member
Avatar
385 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Nov 20, 2013 06:45 |  #15

Mornnb wrote in post #16465994 (external link)
IS is kind of overrated, and with the high iso abilities of modern bodies there is not a huge cost to raising ISO to maintain shutter speed.
IS is nice to have but I wouldn't call it essential.

While this is mostly true, I am sure most of us can't afford those newer cameras or don't want to sacrifice performance in other areas just for less noise at higher ISO levels.


Canon 6D - Canon 1D Mk III - 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | Σ 105mm f/2.8 | Canon 400mm f/5.6L | Σ 35mm f/1.4 | 17-40mm f/4L
flickr (external link)

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

3,714 views & 0 likes for this thread
Missing out on IS?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Redtoon
667 guests, 216 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.