Would you prefer advancements in IS or ISO??

let's start with a 100 ISO without ****ty shadows and then we can go from there

ISO for sure

IS please. I know it seems to go against the general trend but I would like to be able to use long lenses hand held at slow shutter speeds. 400mm plus FL's with SS of 1/60 would be perfect thank you. Actually ISO 25 and 50 would be nice too at times. I also have an illness that affects how still I can hold the camera, so could do with the IS at all FL's. Unfortunately I currently have no IS lenses, but do rent the 100-400 from time to time.

ISO would not help this image, actually I had remembered that I was at 200 ISO I could have opened up the aperture by a stop which could have been a fraction better. Although for this helicopter even 1/60 is too fast, 1/30 would be better but that would be shooting at 10/FL.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

ISO - I only really use 2 lens with IS (I haven't seen my 100-400 in ages) and for the most part I don't get to a point where the IS is really needed...
But I sure love me some higher ISOs!!!

bespoke wrote in post #15936613
let's start with a 100 ISO without ****ty shadows and then we can go from there

This.

ISO definitely! I want a native ISO 50...and if we can get clean stuff at crazy high ISO, sure that's great too.

Even now I shoot quite a bit at ISO 50 - it's not a native setting on my 5D III, but it does produce a cleaner image than ISO 100 (which is especially helpful when doing any exposure blending processes).

Neither. I would like to see advances in manufacturing efficiency so photog equipment wasn't so darn expensive.

pulsar123 wrote in post #15934944
ISO, of course! It is simply more universal. 4 stops more of ISO achieve the same result when dealing with shaky hands situation as 4 stops IS would. In addition, better ISO will help freeze the motion, which IS can't do.

+ 1

pulsar123 wrote in post #15934944
What would you choose - 4 stops better ISO or 4 stops better IS?

ISO, of course! It is simply more universal. 4 stops more of ISO achieve the same result when dealing with shaky hands situation as 4 stops IS would. In addition, better ISO will help freeze the motion, which IS can't do.

I agree and would love 4 stops more ISO, BUT it is very subjective as the helicopter image shows, IS has/would allow for a fast enough shutter speed to keep the heli sharp but slow enough to give motion to the blades, I found IS is very handy to give action shots some movement and life.

The current 4 stop IS already covers me for my desired slow shutter speeds pretty well(sure I wouldn't mind more though), but even with my 5dIII I find at times I can't a high enough shutter speed w/o going up into the areas were it's noise is more than I'd want.

Boy are we getting spoiled, I can't believe that I used to be happy with my 300D and kit lens, yet with my extremely superior gear I have now I'm wishing for more.

lovemyram4x4 wrote in post #15940094
Boy are we getting spoiled, I can't believe that I used to be happy with my 300D and kit lens, yet with my extremely superior gear I have now I'm wishing for more.

Yes I know what you mean...its called the evolution of man...

Now I know why id would (or am) go/going for high ISO performance.

Because i dont like motion blur. My subject doesnt need to be moved, even in streetphotography, thats my style.

I love to show people on the street freezed, that one special moment...

ISO and IS are not interchangeable... we need advances on both!

ISO

Having used the 7D for a while and finding it noisy at higher ISO I'd much rather see more development in noise free high ISO. The 5D3 is fantastic at 6400 and easily passable at 12800 and if the 70D can do anywhere near that and have the 7D's AF system then I'll be at the front end of the queue upon release.