IS or No IS

Apologies in in advance for redux, I'm sure this has come before..... I just couldn't find it !

I'm using a new 70D, a crop camera. I want to find a 500mm lens.

I like to should wildlife, primarily Birds.

The best priced of course are older and have no IS......
Are the benefits great enough that I should seek something newer ?

Please advise, Thanks.

Ted

The prices are that much lower because IS is that important.

What do you plan to shoot with it?

vengence wrote in post #16963552
The prices are that much lower because IS is that important.

I hear ya..... that's what I thought.

runninmann wrote in post #16963559
What do you plan to shoot with it?

I'm for the Birds !

If you're going to be using a tripod - not so much needed. If handheld -yes, you will definitely need it

It is a matter of your skill level at holding the set-up (camera/lens) vs your budget. Given the $ always go for IS. Some people do use longer lenses without IS with success. Remember, IS has not always been around.

I shoot mainly birds with a 400/5.6, which doesn't have IS. I've rarely, if ever, found this to be a problem. Granted, it's a step up to 500mm, but most bird photography is done in decent light with shutter speeds high enough that IS isn't needed. Most of the people I shoot with are using 600mm (sometimes with TCs), and turn off the IS (the thinking is that IS on slows down autofocus, but I think that's arguable.)

That said, however, if I had a choice (read money) I would opt for a lens with it.

seanp3 wrote in post #16963577
If you're going to be using a tripod - not so much needed. If handheld -yes, you will definitely need it

Got it, thanks for your input Sean

gasrocks wrote in post #16963605
It is a matter of your skill level at holding the set-up (camera/lens) vs your budget. Given the $ always go for IS. Some people do use longer lenses without IS with success. Remember, IS has not always been around.

That was my original thought, 'course when I started driving, power steering was not an option either, however given the choice I wouldn't be without it today for everyday driving ! Thanks for your take !

tomj wrote in post #16963641
I shoot mainly birds with a 400/5.6, which doesn't have IS. I've rarely, if ever, found this to be a problem. Granted, it's a step up to 500mm, but most bird photography is done in decent light with shutter speeds high enough that IS isn't needed. Most of the people I shoot with are using 600mm (sometimes with TCs), and turn off the IS (the thinking is that IS on slows down autofocus, but I think that's arguable.)

That said, however, if I had a choice (read money) I would opt for a lens with it.

Well you made me think Tom..... actually a lot of my birds are in the woods, kinda crappy light albeit high shutter speeds. I do believe there is a TC in my future too...... I guess that's all the more reason to hold out for IS !?

Just my 2p (c).
If you are shooting birds (especially small ones) then your subject will normally require a shutter speed that makes IS unnecessary. Where IS is handy is where your camera runs out of usable ISO as it allows you to slow the shutter but you are taking a chance on subject movement.
If you are shooting off a tripod then there is less need for IS though it can be handy when shooting hand held - mainly to stabilise the image in the viewfinder! For what it's worth I turned off the IS on my Canon 800 F5.6 in January and have only turned it back on once (for a couple of minutes) since and yes I do use it hand held occasionally. Since then I have turned off the IS on all my, IS, lenses and am loving the improved AF speed and faster response - but it is handy to have in reserve!
Which lenses are you considering? If you are looking at Canon 500mm lenses then I think that IS or not is not the main question, more importantly if it is a Canon 500mm lens without IS then Canon will no longer service/repair it - this could be more important.

IS has a dual purpose.

a) Stabilize the image on the sensor, so you can use less shutter speed.

b) Stabilize the image in the viewfinder, so you can see what you are aiming at.

Granted, in good conditions, you can shoot over 1/1000 and you'll be fine from image blur.

But, unless you are really good, it is hit or miss whether you can even find the bird with a 500 mm.

Guess I am just the odd man out here. I shoot small birds using shutter speeds under 1/200 usually (I'm after more DOF) and a lens that has no IS. My car (2000 model) has roll down windows. Gene

I seldom use a tripod, and I'll take IS on any focal length lens. Wish my 35mm Sigma had it.

LV Moose wrote in post #16963925
I seldom use a tripod, and I'll take IS on any focal length lens. Wish my 35mm Sigma had it.

This.


And even when i do use a tripod, i still leave IS on (including my 300/4 IS, which they say to turn off).

Honesty, and this is most likely a biased opinion, but I wish I could have the option of IS on every single lens I purchased. I would pay a good amount of money extra for that.

After shooting handheld with the 70-200 2.8 II IS indoors, in low light, with no flash, I was amazed at the shots I could get without a tripod or monopod. It's worth it but yes price is a factor given your personal usage.

With proper technique (adequate shutter speed, using a tripod and perhaps even a remote release) you do not need IS on any lens. We shot that way for years before IS was thought of.