What's more important: Image Stabilization or a fast lens?

[QUOTE=Scuff;2038178]

tsaraleksi wrote in post #2038150
To me IS gives more flexibilty. Of course you can turn it off. I presume you are quoting the price of the 70-200 non- IS, exept that Canon do not make it anymore! So the extra $600 doesn't come into it.

It's still being sold new, anyway.

[QUOTE=liza;2038191]

Scuff wrote in post #2038178
Since when did Canon cease production on the 70-200 non-IS?

Absoulutely right Lisa - my mistake.......

I just thought they didn't sell any of them anymore

I still choose IS - anybody else want to try and change my mind.

Steve Parr wrote in post #2037981
I do concert photography, and have learned one undeniable truth: Light is life. A fast lens, for the type of photography I do, beats out IS any day...

And better put, things almost always move. Being able to get enough light to freeze moving things beats out IS and its handicapped ability to do this.

IS helps, but it only helps for particular shots.

lensview wrote in post #2037727
yes

Bingo!

It all depends on what you shoot.

Personally, I'll typically prefer the faster lens because I like available/low light photography over flash. At night, you don't typically need a great DoF since most of the image is in darkness. So being able to open up and shoot handheld is great. You'll notice that there are no IS primes... IS is a crutch, but a nice one. But it doesn't substitute for aperture. If you could open up more, you wouldn't need such a slow shutter speed, causing camera shake and requiring IS. For this reason there exists bright primes and slower IS zooms.

If you're in dim (or no) lighting, you'll likely be using a tripod or flash anyway and in that case, the brighter lens gives you more DoF control over a broader range of apertures. IS doesn't work on tripods so much anyway and a flash brings up shutter speeds.

IS rocks when it comes to panning and longer focal lengths. Chasing flying birds with an IS lens is a dream. Dynamic scenes where tripods are unwieldy are great for IS also. IS is great for "shooting from the hip" in a lot of situations. Try following your dog around the yard while thinking about maintaining focus and exposure, knowing that the IS is helping out with smoothing out the bumps so you can get the shot...

Which brings up the last point. IS stops camera shake, it does not freeze motion - that's something only faster shutter speeds can do - which requires brighter apertures.

EDIT: That's what makes the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS so special. It's as bright as zooms get *and* has IS.

Double Negative wrote in post #2038244
Bingo!
You'll notice that there are no IS primes...

Yes there are...

tsaraleksi wrote in post #2038270
Yes there are...

?? ??

Peregrin wrote in post #2038273
?? ??

if he's talking about IS primes in any focal length, then yes, the superteles such as the 300/4L IS (and 2.8 ), 500/4L IS all have IS and are of course, primes

BryanP wrote in post #2038283
if he's talking about IS primes in any focal length, then yes, the superteles such as the 300/4L IS (and 2.8 ), 500/4L IS all have IS and are of course, primes

Exactly-- I believe that every lens 300 and up in production has IS now. Except for the 400/5.6 it seems.

And of course I'd go for IS on a super-tele. Minimum handhold speeds for those monsters are outrageous.

BryanP wrote in post #2038283
if he's talking about IS primes in any focal length, then yes, the superteles such as the 300/4L IS (and 2.8 ), 500/4L IS all have IS and are of course, primes

Just great...one MORE reason why I want the 300 f/2.8
(I wasn't thinking of the biggest primes and I didn't know the 300 f/4 had it...)

Well, true - I didn't include super telephotos in that statement. I was talking about more average focal lengths on the lower end. The longer the focal length, the more benefit you'll see from IS as camera shake is magnified a great deal.

I have 2 IS lenses: 70-200 f2.8L IS which is fast for sure, and 100-400IS not so fast but doesn't matter.
the rest are all fast zooms except that 10-22, I need Fast lens more than IS, but if i can get fast and IS together in one lens then it is a big Prize.

buckwheat wrote in post #2037853
Maybe it is just my experience, but if I get IS one day it will have to be f/2.8 or faster...and that means a 500 pound lens.

not true, there is an ef-s 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. too bad for your 5d.

Someone on this thread made a valued point. Use your primes if you need low light shots as getting f/2.8 zooms are heavy-ish.

24-105 f/4 IS is 83x107 and 670g
24-70 f/2.8 is 83x123 and 950g

So the IS is smaller and lighter making it easier to use long term

IS above all. Forget the f/2.8 crap. It's never fast enough anyway.

Lightstream wrote in post #2038962
IS above all. Forget the f/2.8 crap. It's never fast enough anyway.

primes!