Another Thought on "IS vs. Non-IS"

So months ago while making my purchase decision on a 70-200 2.8 IS vs. Non-IS, I came to the conclusion that since I was primarily using the lens for sports, I wouldn't need IS since my shutter speeds are almost always over 1/500. While shooting the other day (without a monopod), I noticed my minor shaking in the view finder and came to the realization that even though the shutter speed will capture my moving subject, I could perhaps be missing out on some shots because of mis-focusing due to tracking the wrong part of my subject. I usually get a fairly good keeper rate, but has anyone else thought about this? For instance, I was trying to stay focused on a player's face, but with my mild shaking, I'm sure I was hitting some shots on his face, his body, his arms, etc. Obviously these are moving subjects, but I now wonder if the number of in-focus shots (as in where I wanted the focus to be) could improve even further if I had an IS lens. I've heard stories over time that some pros turn off IS due to the "wind-up" period of the gryos, so I'm curious and would appreciate any input on the topic.

Thanks for your help!

The new IS system on some lenses only helps with panning but not always with sports

There are times in shooting sports in which you are "forced" to shoot at rather slow shutter speeds. This will be true if you shoot amateur sports at night either in a stadium or a gym. Lighting in those venues is far less bright than professional sports venues and a small fraction of the light outdoors in the sun.

However, when you absolutely need a faster aperture in situations such as in a gym or in a dim non-pro playing field, a fast prime will be the ticket. The fastest zoom lens is f/2.8 and is just not fast enough; while many other zooms are f/4, f/5.6 or even f/6.3 at the long end of the zoom.

No! Image Stabilization or and other anti-shake technology doesn't stop moving subjects but, and this is a big BUT, you can get the general image in the frame sharp and have the subject blurred. Sometimes this provides a nice effect.

You can also use the panning mode 2 (some lenses automatically compensate for panning without switching modes) and pan with your subject at a slower shutter speed.

Not all "SPORTS" subjects are of fast moving subjects. Quite often you can shoot "at the peak of the action" and use a slower shutter speed to freeze the action. Additionally, shooting a moving subject as it approaches you directly or moves directly away from you will work with a slower shutter speed than shooting a subject which is moving across the frame.

Also, some sports images are of athletes that are not moving such as lining up in football or at the starting block in track.

Finally, IS capability will allow you to use your telephoto lens in a myriad of venues. While now, you use the telephoto lens almost exclusively shooting sports, one of the traditional tele lens venues; having IS or some other compensation technology will allow you to hand hold your lens in a myriad of other venues. I carry my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens everywhere and I probably shoot 1/3 to 1/2 of my images with that lens. BTW: because of IS, I can hand-hold this lens successfully in lower light levels than I can hand hold a 70-200mm f/2.8L (non-IS) lens. With IS in an f/2.8 lens, it becomes even a more a viable lower light glass.

Yes, lenses with IS capability are more expensive than non-IS lenses! However, lenses last a long while and amortized over that time, the extra money is IMO well worth the expense.

AND... You can always turn off an IS equipped lens. You cannot turn on IS in a lens that is not equipped with that technology.

To the OP, what body are you using?

I've used IS in panning mode to help track moving subjects, even when my shutter speed is high enough to avoid camera shake. I find the steadier view helpful in some situations (usually with slower subjects like people or dogs).

If you can afford IS, get it. It's a rare photographer that never shoots anything but high shutter speeds ever.

Even shooting sports, I will sometimes stop down a lens and shoot at a slower shutter speed (for more DOF) when I'm shooting those team huddle shots or things like that. And most people end up using their lenses for more than just sports, even if sports is their main interest.

How much are you shaking? IS can only do so much. Rent an IS version if you want to know specifically for you whether or not it will help.

Thanks everyone, I appreciate the feedback. My thought was more on utilizing IS to help stabilize the view through the viewfinder to ensure I'm focusing where I want to focus.

Sort of like a shoting from a sniper rifle rather than using an Uzi and spraying and praying.

I'm using a 7D, btw.

Bikeboyjr wrote in post #13183436
Thanks everyone, I appreciate the feedback. My thought was more on utilizing IS to help stabilize the view through the viewfinder to ensure I'm focusing where I want to focus.

Sort of like a shoting from a sniper rifle rather than using an Uzi and spraying and praying.

I'm using a 7D, btw.

With the 7D, you can use 19pt in servo and pick a starting focus point and let the camera help you track the subject. This will help make up for not having a stabilized view finder. Also since most of the time when shooting sports, you are tracking a subject that is trying to fake out the people around them, there is a better chance they are also faking out the photographer so this is even a better reason to use 19PT. Zone AF will also track the subject if you can keep the subject in the zone you picked.

I've found that even though I may be using high enough shutter speeds to stop any camera shake, having IS is still a convenient benefit with a long lens as an aid to aquiring and tracking a subject. I recently switched from an IS to a non IS lens (Canon 400/5.6) mainly for bird photography, and while I'm fine without the feature, I do kind of miss it.

Another thing: There is (or at least was) a good video on the B&H web site about Canon autofocus. In it, the presenter, a Canon rep, states that IS helps AI Servo focus faster because the camera has less work to do tracking a steady image (or something like that - it's been a while since I've seen it). I've frequently heard the opposite, but the Canon guy was pretty specific about it, and I'm assuming he knows what he's talking about.

In any event, all other things about a lens being equal, I think the IS version is well worth it if you can afford it.

IMO , IS always helps, it might be less on sport situations but it always help

I turn off IS when shooting sports because I felt that it slows down AF.

bottom line is you'll get many more keepers with an IS equipped lens. many more.

ed rader

IS helps with exactly the thing you are mentioning. Viewfinder stability is really nice when you are trying to track a small target or piece of a target. When I upgraded my 70-200 non-IS to the IS II that's the first thing I noticed. I leave it on for sports. I have not noticed any AF issues with it.

One thing you need to be aware of is that IS takes a while to engage which during this "engaging time" images can be fuzzy.