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 13 Mar 2016 (Sunday) 13:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is IS overrated and worth the extra cost ?

 
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,606 posts
Gallery: 104 photos
Likes: 3365
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Mar 15, 2016 04:11 |  #46

johnf3f wrote in post #17935373 (external link)
It wasn't my intention to stir up a Hornet's nest here but the OP asked is IS overrated?
In my opinion and experience IS/OS etc hinder photography these days with modern cmeras. It was a great feature when introduced but is of far less relevance today to the extent that I don't want it.

Lets just agree to disagree. I have gained a significant improvement in the quality and keeper rate of my images by disabling IS. I would just like others to benefit from this. Could I benefit even more by removing IS all together? I think so but that option is not available to me.

Just try the OFF position - you might like it..........


Myself, I tried it for 8 years with my 400 5.6 L.


Dave
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mrmarklin
Senior Member
558 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Aug 2006
Location: People's Republik of Kalifornia
     
Mar 15, 2016 22:49 |  #47

The answers are yes and yes.;-)a


Canon EOS 5D also Mk III, 24-70L, 85 IIL, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8 IS L, 180 Macro L, 100 f/2.8L IS Macro, 100-400 L IS, 8-15 L Fisheye f/4, 16-35 L, 50 L , TS-E 24 L, 600 L, Extender 1.4X & 2X II, Speedlite 580EX x 2, MT-24EX Macro Twin Lite, ST-E2, Angle Finder C, RS-80N3 Remote Switch, Focusing Screen EE-D, BG-E4, Manfrotto 458B Neotec tripodw/Acratech 1155 GP Ballhead.:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,721 posts
Likes: 120
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Mar 24, 2016 19:23 |  #48

I have been experimenting with leaving it off with my 500 and 1.4X mounted. Certainly some of the photos are sharper than those with IS turned on.
I will continue to try both ways but maybe john3f is right.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,055 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3421
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Mar 25, 2016 12:49 |  #49

.

I think that IS is of great importance when shooting handheld with long focal lengths. It is really impossible to overestimate something that is of such enormous import.

I bought the new version of the 100-400 just because of the superior IS.
The version 1 had 1 to 1 1/2 stop IS. The version 2 has 4 stop IS.

For years, using my version 1, I would miss so many shots simply because of camera movement in low light situations. Some of the most incredible things I have ever photographed produced worthless crap images that I couldn't sell because I simply didn't have any way to get a tripod set up quickly enough, and because the light was too low for sharp handheld shots. Now, with the 4 stop IS, I get so many great keepers that I would never ever have been able to get with the 1 1/2 stop IS on the version 1.

4 stop IS is worth every penny, and then some.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,721 posts
Likes: 120
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Mar 25, 2016 14:19 |  #50

I have used & loved IS for years. I own 4 lenses with it including the 100-400 II.
Why I have gotten sharper images with it off is a mystery to me. -?
I will shoot more with the intension of figuring what works best.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,999 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 617
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Mar 25, 2016 18:36 |  #51

Well folks I think that I may have to update/revise my previous posts.
Very recently I acquired a Canon 100-400 Mk2 with it's new IS system. So far I am very pleased with this lens except for one thing - I can't hold the damn thing steady! I don't understand what is going on here, my Mk1 wasn't a problem, nor 300 F4, 70-200, 400 F5.6, 300F2.8 etc etc - even hand holding my Canon 800 F5.6 L IS is a breeze compared to the 100-400 Mk2!
As a result I have been trying out the IS system. Modes 1 and 2 seem to be just as useless as the previous versions but mode 3 is looking interesting. Unfortunately the image in the viewfinder still vibrates a lot but the images are OK - so perhaps it's working as it should and it doesn't seem to interfere with AF so this may well end up being my preferred setting. If that doesn't work then the Neoprene LensCoat will be upgraded to a LeadCoat - that will sort out my shakes!:twisted:


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Mar 27, 2016 11:52 |  #52

I don't consider IS to be a deal breaker. There was a time when IS was not on any lens. We got along just fine. But if there are two lenses one with IS and the other without, I will take the one with IS every single time. No question about it.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,055 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3421
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Tom Reichner with reason 'I removed an extra word, the word "walking". I've no idea why it was there in the first place.'.
     
Mar 27, 2016 15:49 |  #53

ebiggs wrote in post #17950670 (external link)
I don't consider IS to be a deal breaker. There was a time when IS was not on any lens. We got along just fine.

There were many who did not "get along just fine" before the days of IS. Sure, people were able to take some great photos without IS, but there were also many situations in which people just couldn't take a great photo, and now with IS we can take excellent photos in those handheld, low-light conditions.

Yesterday I spend much of the day taking photos under the forest canopy. It was a heavily overcast day, so under the tree canopy it was especially dim. There was no way to set up a tripod due to the extremely thick vegetation, and I wanted to shoot at small apertures so that I could get as much depth of field as possible. So I was shooting a lot at 400mm at a 60th of a second, or at a 30th of a second, or at 25th of a second. A few frames were even down at around a 15th of a second. At 300 and 400mm. Handheld. How could anyone possibly "get along just fine" in those situations without 4 stop IS?

Under certain conditions and with certain subject matter, no IS means passing up a lot of really great image-making opportunities and going home without any keepers. That sucks.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,503 posts
Gallery: 159 photos
Likes: 6058
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by CyberDyneSystems.
     
Mar 27, 2016 23:08 |  #54

For me IS is the single greatest improvement in lens tech in the last 20 years.

My primary birdinglens for some time was a 500mm prime without IS.
It was an amazing lens. fantastic IQ, and super fast accurate AF.

The day, and I do mean DAY ONE that I first shot with the Canon 500mm f/4L IS, it was all over for the old non IS. My keeper rrat6e more than doubled in a day.

Now things have changed a lot, 500mm is no longer the realm of Super-elite-Supertelephoto primes at Super-high price tags. For under a grand we can carry hand held 600mm zoom on a sub $1K 1.6 crop body easily, shooting quickly with near 1000mm field of view!

IS, IMHO makes this a reasonable thing to attempt. Results speak for themselves.

Long lenses is just one place where IS really helps, Macro, any hand held shooting in low light, all can benefit.

Is it over rated? I don't know, I don't see it being hyped up. It's just a very helpful tool. Are tripods over rated?


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,503 posts
Gallery: 159 photos
Likes: 6058
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Mar 27, 2016 23:19 |  #55

DreDaze wrote in post #17934362 (external link)
it's more like they are giving you IS for free...you can't buy an 800mm non IS lens...so there's no way to know if it actually costs more...can't say anything about your 2nd point...but for the third...does less lens elements automatically equal better IQ? i always thought it was almost the other way around...more elements= better IQ

Too some extent. SIGMA has had an 800mm prime for far longer than Canon's recent offering. No OS on it to date.

One can get the pre IS Canon 500mm, or again, a SIGMA 500mm prime, again with no IS. None of these non IS models are in any way sharper or better at AF than the IS models we can compare them to.

The Canon non IS 500mm and the first gen IS model are examples that adding IS did not appear to impede either IQ or AF speed. In this case for both aspects the IS model wins.

I do not think there can be a realistic IQ loss for the IS system. Even though in theory it sounds right, in practice and measurement the IS Prime models beat out the non IS models. In Zooms it used to be true, (70-200mm non IS sharper than 70-200mm IS (v1) but I don't think it would be today either. The 70-200mm IS MkII and all it's stable mates are all unhindered by any lack of IQ that IS might have added. 100-400mm MkII is sharp as a good prime etc.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,606 posts
Gallery: 104 photos
Likes: 3365
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Mar 27, 2016 23:19 |  #56

johnf3f wrote in post #17948666 (external link)
Well folks I think that I may have to update/revise my previous posts.
Very recently I acquired a Canon 100-400 Mk2 with it's new IS system. So far I am very pleased with this lens except for one thing - I can't hold the damn thing steady! I don't understand what is going on here, my Mk1 wasn't a problem, nor 300 F4, 70-200, 400 F5.6, 300F2.8 etc etc - even hand holding my Canon 800 F5.6 L IS is a breeze compared to the 100-400 Mk2!
As a result I have been trying out the IS system. Modes 1 and 2 seem to be just as useless as the previous versions but mode 3 is looking interesting. Unfortunately the image in the viewfinder still vibrates a lot but the images are OK - so perhaps it's working as it should and it doesn't seem to interfere with AF so this may well end up being my preferred setting. If that doesn't work then the Neoprene LensCoat will be upgraded to a LeadCoat - that will sort out my shakes!:twisted:

Quick, check your Triopo ball head and see if it sags with load, you may have entered a parallel universe :lol:


Dave
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,017 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 2156
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Mar 27, 2016 23:23 |  #57

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17951384 (external link)
Too some extent. SIGMA has had an 800mm prime for far longer than Canon's recent offering. No OS on it to date.

One can get the pre IS Canon 500mm, or again, a SIGMA 500mm prime, again with no IS. None of these non IS models are in any way sharper or better at AF than the IS models we can compare them to.

The Canon non IS 500mm and the first gen IS model are examples that adding IS did not appear to impede either IQ or AF speed. In this case for both aspects the IS model wins.

I do not think there can be a realistic IQ loss for the IS system. Even though in theory it sounds right, in practice and measurement the IS Prime models beat out the non IS models. In Zooms it used to be true, (70-200mm non IS sharper than 70-200mm IS (v1) but I don't think it would be today either. The 70-200mm IS MkII and all it's stable mates are all unhindered by any lack of IQ that IS might have added. 100-400mm MkII is sharp as a good prime etc.

yeah, my main point is that for the OP, the whole, 'in the future i won't be paying extra for IS' is a bit of a joke...there won't be an option...canon isn't introducing a 100-400mm non IS for $1,000...so you're stuck with the 100-400II...there won't be a 300mm f2.8 non IS coming out ever again...so you're buying IS in lenses if you want to or not...there's no option to not pay for extra...it's IS or an older lens...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,503 posts
Gallery: 159 photos
Likes: 6058
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited over 3 years ago by CyberDyneSystems.
     
Mar 27, 2016 23:25 |  #58

Got it, I quoted you, but it was more aimed at John, re: the idea that IS is somehow making the IQ lower.

On that note, it's clearly different strokes, in my case I once had an excellent top notch dream lens @ 800mm (SIGMA 300-800mm)
Amazing sharp, but for me even on a tripod I struggled with that focal length without IS. I always reached for the 500mm IS instead, wand added T-Cons to when I needed 700mm - 1000mm. Sold the 300-800mm. Would still have it if it had a good IS system.

Again, that;s me. I know at least two 800mm shooters that can do it without IS hand held with good results. I am simply not one of them!


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Mar 28, 2016 10:50 |  #59

Tom Reichner wrote in post #17950935 (external link)
There were many who did not "get along just fine" before the days of IS. Sure, people were able to take some great photos without IS, but there were also many situations in which people just couldn't take a great photo, and now with IS we can take excellent photos in those handheld, low-light conditions.

Yesterday I spend much of the day taking photos under the forest canopy. It was a heavily overcast day, so under the tree canopy it was especially dim. There was no way to set up a tripod due to the extremely thick vegetation, and I wanted to shoot at small apertures so that I could get as much depth of field as possible. So I was shooting a lot at 400mm at a 60th of a second, or at a 30th of a second, or at 25th of a second. A few frames were even down at around a 15th of a second. At 300 and 400mm. Handheld. How could anyone possibly "get along just fine" in those situations without 4 stop IS?

Under certain conditions and with certain subject matter, no IS means passing up a lot of really great image-making opportunities and walking going home without any keepers. That sucks.

.

Perhaps so, but you also failed to mention high ISO's that also make the shot you are talking about possible. There is no doubt camera and photography has improved with each technological advance. The fact remains we got the shots. You did what you had to to do it. Remember great photographs are more, you, post editing and lastly gear. Don't forget or diminish technique and how important it is.
I admitted if two identical lenses one with IS and one without, I will choose the IS every time.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,055 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3421
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Mar 28, 2016 12:13 |  #60

ebiggs wrote in post #17951844 (external link)
Remember great photographs are more, you, post editing and lastly gear. Don't forget or diminish technique and how important it is.

Post editing is no where near as important as gear for the types of photos I take. Not even close. I could pretty easily get by without any editing software at all. That's right - SOOC would be fine with me. But take away IS and AF and high ISOs and I would barely be able to capture anything the way I want to.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

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

20,374 views & 53 likes for this thread
Is IS overrated and worth the extra cost ?
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 KenJerrard
1058 guests, 383 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.