If You Had To Choose: 1 more f stop or IS?

I'm thinking about some lens upgrades and I don't know whether having an extra f stop or having IS is more beneficial. I've seen and read many of the threads but I would like to cut to the chase and just get an overview based on responses to this poll.

I know everyone has their own reasons but I am just trying to get the 'big picture' and see if there is an overwhelming preference one way or the other.

Yes, you guessed it... I, like many, am looking at the 24-70mm f/2.8 L and the 24-105mm f/4 IS but I don't want this to be about which one of these lenses you would choose.

I've never owned an IS lens before so I honestly don't know what I'm missing but I do know that I've had situations where lighting is pretty good and I'm getting great exposures without having to crank the ISO but every so often there will be a low light shot that I get a shutter speed (in Av mode) of 1/15, 1/20, or 1/30 and I get some motion blur. If everything else is properly exposed I would rather not change my ISO just for those few shots.

So for those times, what makes the most sense? An extra stop would get me to a shutter speed that I know I can shoot handheld without blur, and from what I understand, IS will do the same.

If you're not a nervous, shaky guy, the IS shouldn't mean anything to you anyway. IS, as you know, doesn't freeze motion, only helps with that hand of yours. 30D gives a great grip as is, it's up to you if you think you can hold her steady. Not to mention the range given isn't exactly hard to shoot hand-held. I say the 24-70, you already have a 70-200.

august23 wrote in post #2711541
If you're not a nervous, shaky guy, the IS shouldn't mean anything to you anyway. IS, as you know, doesn't freeze motion, only helps with that hand of yours. 30D gives a great grip as is, it's up to you if you think you can hold her steady. Not to mention the range given isn't exactly hard to shoot hand-held. I say the 24-70, you already have a 70-200.

I actually do have a steady hand and do not encounter many situations that I can't handhold at 1/40, 1/50 but just need that little extra edge for the shots that I need another f stop. I've been leaning towards the wider aperture but wanted to see if there was some glaring reason to go with IS.

TMR Design wrote in post #2711556
I actually do have a steady hand and do not encounter many situations that I can't handhold at 1/40, 1/50 but just need that little extra edge for the shots that I need another f stop. I've been leaning towards the wider aperture but wanted to see if there was some glaring reason to go with IS.

the 24-105L gives you a 2-stop advantage over the 24-70L.

ed rader

Nope. I don't own either, but I've read everything everone has to say about them. Majority rules 24-70. The only people who will tell you to consider differently are those who own the 105.

august23 wrote in post #2711568
Nope. I don't own either, but I've read everything everone has to say about them. Majority rules 24-70. The only people who will tell you to consider differently are those who own the 105.

there you go again !

ed rader

Leave me alone Ed!!:p

Id say it depends on the lens and range. My 70-200f4L IS gives me 4 stops of IS and a 3 stop advantage over a 70-200 F2.8 non IS if I am thinking about it correctly. I dont often need to stop action so it was an easy decision for me. The weight/size difference of the F4L IS and 2.8 also steered me away from the latter.

I chose the 24-105 over the 24-70 for its additional reach and IS, with that kind of walkabout lens I felt IS would be more useful.
On the other hand my 70-200 f/2.8 is a non IS model and I chose to have a non IS as I didn't feel the need for IS.

24-70 2.8 all the way.. the bokeh is soo creamy

i say it always depends on your shooting style and the length of the lens. for telephotos past 200mm, i'de take the extra stop over IS. for really wide shots, i'de probably take the extra stop as well, but that's only because i am confident in my handholding. for the middle ranges, it depends on if i want to stop down normally or not... f8 portraits aren't too uncommon for me (get in close, background far away, means very sharp with good oof parts as well), so i'de want the IS over the useless extra stop.

My sig should tell the story. F4 does not play nice with indoor sports. I love love love love my 24-70, also.

I would consider weight into the equation as well.
If the weight is important to me, I'll choose the IS, otherwise one stop faster.

i have the 70-200 2.8L IS and to be honest the IS has only been switched on once when the light was very poor to be honest i never use IS but it is nice to fall back on

TMR Design wrote in post #2711492
Yes, you guessed it... I, like many, am looking at the 24-70mm f/2.8 L and the 24-105mm f/4 IS but I don't want this to be about which one of these lenses you would choose.

Best choice is the 24-70 unless you need the additional reach. IS with shorter focal lengths only benefits those who drink too much coffee.
Mike