Move from 24-105 F4 IS to 24-70 2.8II - will I miss IS ?

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #17827363
I agree with some of the above but also disagree. With a move to higher megapixel cameras it does matter.

It doesn't and no other DSLR, has the resolution of the ole time film cameras. IS is just another tool and in some case it does help but it is not a deal breaker.
If two identical lenses are the choice with the only difference being IS, I would choose the one with IS. But if a lens I want does not have IS, I see it as a none factor.

ebiggs wrote in post #17828389
It doesn't and no other DSLR, has the resolution of the ole time film cameras. IS is just another tool and in some case it does help but it is not a deal breaker.
If two identical lenses are the choice with the only difference being IS, I would choose the one with IS. But if a lens I want does not have IS, I see it as a none factor.

Lets agree to disagree on it being a non factor. I have had a 5DSR and an A7rii since the day they have been released and it matters very much. While it is true old large format film had theoretically insane resolving ability - most lenses of that era did not so todays 50 megapixel digital sensors and new state of the art lenses are producing the detail of those old large format film setups;moreover, my point, I should have been more clear, is from a handheld perspective not a tripod perspective.

You can take pictures all day long at 1/FL with a 5D3 on non IS lens such as the 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L and with good technique your batting average for sharpness will be very high. That just is not remotely the case with the 5DSR. I have tested this over and over to find my shutter speeds where I will get a 90% hit rate on tack sharpness and on the 5DSR, with non IS lenses, it is approximately 1/4FL. So, with a 5DSR not having IS is a big deal - otherwise there is no point creating massive files if there is no more detail than what is produced with the 5D3.

I have in fact evolved my entire lens choices based entirely on IS for the 5DSR - or having a fast enough and sharp enough prime such that 1 /4FL is a non factor - and for the 5DSR, the only non IS prime that makes the cut for me in indoor light is the new 35L II because you can shoot at 1/125 at F1.4 and not run out of ISO and still get tack sharp images - the other prime is the 35F2 IS where you can shoot at F2.2 at 1/15th and get a very sharp centre frame.

I also stopped using my 24-70 F2.8 II on the 5DSR unless there is good outdoor light or when using flash because again you have to be up at 1/4FL to get tack sharp images with a high consistency. I moved to using the Sigma 24-105 F4 IS as the main lens for this camera or the 70-200 F2.8 or F4 IS.

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #17828516
Lets agree to disagree on it being a non factor. I have had a 5DSR and an A7rii since the day they have been released and it matters very much. While it is true old large format film had theoretically insane resolving ability - most lenses of that area did not so todays 50 megapixel digital sensors and new state of the art lenses are producing the detail of those old large format film setups;moreover, my point, I should have been more clear, is from a handheld perspective not a tripod perspective.

You can take pictures all day long at 1/FL with a 5D3 on non IS lens such as the 35L, 50L, 85L and 135L and with good tech your batting average for sharpness will be very high. That just is not remotely the case with the 5DSR. I have tested this over and over to find my shutter speeds where I will get a 90% hit rate on tack sharpness and on the 5DSR, with non IS lenses, it is approximately 1/4FL. So, with a 5DSR not having IS is a big deal - otherwise there is no point creating massive files if there is no more detail than what is produced with the 5D3.

I have in fact evolved my entire lens choices based entirely on IS for the 5DSR - or having a fast enough and sharp enough prime such that 1 /4FL is a non factor - and for the 5DSR, the only non IS prime that makes the cut for me in indoor light is the new 35L II because you can shoot at 1/125 at F1.4 and not run out of ISO and still get tack sharp images - the other prime is the 35F2 IS where you can shoot at F2.2 at 1/15th and get a very sharp centre frame.

I also stopped using my 24-70 F2.8 II on the 5DSR unless there is good outdoor light or when using flash because again you have to be up at 1/4FL to get tack sharp images with a high consistency. I moved to using the Sigma 24-105 F4 IS as the main lens for this camera or the 70-200 F2.8 or F4 IS.

I had a really hard time with it on my 6D. I was getting maybe a 1:20 ratio of good shots to throwaways, and that's compared to 1:10-15 I get with the 24-70 f4 IS and the 24-105 f4 IS. So yes, having IS does make a huge difference for me. I guess I am just one of those people that are better suited with it. After all, it is purely subjective to what the person behind the viewfinder.