70-200L 2.8 - IS OR NOT??? (i could use some help)

If you were to use the f/2.8 for sporting events on a tripod is there and point in getting IS ?

Dan

Exactly! There is only one reason to pay extra for IS and that is that you want or need to use shutter speeds slower than normal (say, more than 1/200 sec at 200mm for example). If you are always going to choose faster shutter speeds e.g. because you shoot fast moving sports, then IS is not going to make much (if any) difference to your shots. I shoot soccer with my 70-200 and never use a shutter speed slower than 1/400 sec.

Well thanks guys for all of your help...

The reason i want IS is because i have the Canon 17-85 IS, and i really do use IS a lot. If i got the 70-200, i dont know if i would use the IS as much or not, but i would hate to not get it, and then regret it later. I dont konw what i would be shooting much of at 200mm using IS, but, im sure i would just becuase i use it frequently on my 17-85... you know what i mean?

For all of you that answered to GET the IS, do you really use IS when you are shooting at telephoto lengths, or at least as much as you thought you would?

thanks
devin

Looks like it's time for an upgrade, Mark.

As far as the "to-IS or not-to-IS" debate goes, I got IS and never looked back. At this point I wouldn't have it any other way.

First you have to decide if you really need the f/2.8

I would vote for IS, its a great technology

I don't know about ya'll

But, I leave my IS on all the time.

the IS locks on pretty fast.

@ 200mm with IS off.......it does not take much to move that image.

At least for me.

Buy the best you can afford without killing your wallet. And also consider weight. 2.8 telephotos will always be heavy.

If that's not a problem(and the cost), then you are getting arguably the best zoom lens out there, in the 70-200 IS.

I have the non-IS. The only time i've been left wanting is when I'm shooting dusk/after dusk outdoors. The regular lens pulls in a lot of light and still has good image quality wide open. Since most of what I use it for is sports, I'm usually shooting a fast enough shutter speed to freeze my image without the stabilization. If you planned to shoot wildlife or something where you may be able to run a lower shutter speed, and pull in extra light, then you could definately benefit from the IS version.

Realize, of course, that you will be paying a premium for the feature, on glass that is inheritantly fast. As I mentioned above, consider your use when considering your purchase.

Bruce

Mate, I can tell you from personal experience that the 70-200 f/2.8L WITH IS is worth every cent. Look at it this way, if it doesn't give you sharper images, at least it'll give you forearms like Popeye from holdin' it up to your face Not sure if the ladies go for a bloke with huge forearms though.

Get the IS. You don't need to use it (but it doesn't magically stop working at faster shutter speeds; it'll help even at "safe" handholding speeds). If you don't get it, you won't be able to use it when you need it.

Get the lens you can afford. If you cannot afford the IS version do not get, otherwise get it. I would rather ensure the ability to get a shot (by using IS) then worrying about the non-IS version of the lens being ever so slightly sharper. Remember the sharpness is not everything when it comes to a lens.

Thanks again guys...
It is not a matter of affording it. I havent got bags of cash, but i would be willing to save up just a little more for it. I just didnt know whether to save and wait, or go now and get without IS.

I think i will save up for it, seems according to most of you, that would be the better way to go. Plus, later on down the road, when i possibly get into business, it will probably be a really good lens to already have, and one i wont have to go out and buy. So ill let you all know when i get it, when i am done saving up a lil more! lolol

Meaty0 wrote:
Mate, I can tell you from personal experience that the 70-200 f/2.8L WITH IS is worth every cent. Look at it this way, if it doesn't give you sharper images, at least it'll give you forearms like Popeye from holdin' it up to your face Not sure if the ladies go for a bloke with huge forearms though.

Hey meaty, thanks for the very well thought out, and inspiring post. I admire your amazing contemplation on this intense subject.
I look forward to you future support!

I love my 100-400 IS, but my questionis how do you plan to use the lens? What kind of photography? There is a lot you can do with the IS and only a few situations where you turn the IS off, such as sports photography on a monopod. Don't make the mistake I made with my first lens, GET THE 2.8 you will never regret having a faster lens. I have, many times not having a 2.8.