before IS was invented...

what did people do?

i just pulled a trigger on a used 70-200 2.8L non-IS. i just couldnt afford the IS version.

i know image stabilization hasnt been around forever. it just seems like more people are just relying on technology instead of improving their own shooting form.

dont get me wrong, technology is great, but back in the day before IS was introduced, how did people deal with longer focal lengths? were they always tethered to a monopod or tripod?

i know there are IS or non-IS threads every day, and i've been reading them :P but if my main concentration of shooting is static objects (cars) and soon hopefully outdoor portraiture, am i really going to be affected with the lack of IS?

thanks

Assuming they didn't have a tripod or monopod on them I'm guessing if they really needed the extra stop or two they looked for things to brace themselves against.

It just makes it easier eryk, allows you to keep ISO's down giving you better images. You say you shoot static objects, so IS would help tremendously. But....use a tripod and or shoot in decent light and you'll be fine...It's an aid....it's a helluva aid that I happen to think is an amazing technology....But like you allude to...it was done for years without, just folks used tripods or beanbags or had rock steady hands or shot high ASA's or ISO's.
To me the IS is worth the extra $, to others it isn't. I've owned both, I don't have the steadiest hands, I love IS on any length lens...versatility Brother!

e r y k wrote in post #4921625
what did people do?

i just pulled a trigger on a used 70-200 2.8L non-IS. i just couldnt afford the IS version.

i know image stabilization hasnt been around forever. it just seems like more people are just relying on technology instead of improving their own shooting form.

dont get me wrong, technology is great, but back in the day before IS was introduced, how did people deal with longer focal lengths? were they always tethered to a monopod or tripod?

i know there are IS or non-IS threads every day, and i've been reading them :P but if my main concentration of shooting is static objects (cars) and soon hopefully outdoor portraiture, am i really going to be affected with the lack of IS?

thanks

a 16 oz budweiser is worth one stop .

ed rader

They used REAL photo TECHNIQUE, not laziness.

tripods, monopods, human tripods, walls to brace on, etc

Also, high speed film, noise was accepted back then, people are too fussy thesedays.

Chiva wrote in post #4921751
They used REAL photo TECHNIQUE, not laziness.

tripods, monopods, human tripods, walls to brace on, etc

Also, high speed film, noise was accepted back then, people are too fussy thesedays.

yeah i really long for the old days........

NOT!

ed rader

they used this ... http://www.switched.co​m …tabilizer-for-any-camera/

I truly believe that with practice, and remembering to rest the camera in your left hand rather than gripping it with your right, remembering to squeeze the shutter halfway (with the fleshy part of your index finger) before taking the shot, remembering to breathe...you'll be just fine...
another thought...
using single rather than multiple shots may help you concentrate...
Good luck...

ed rader wrote in post #4921750
a 16 oz budweiser is worth one stop .

ed rader

best thing ive read all day, i actually laughed out loud

IS is great. But it's not the earth shattering invention that many people make it out to be. It simply makes it easier to hand hold when you don't have a tripod available. For many of us there is no use at all for IS.

Set your shutter speed at at least 1/focal length x crop factor and you should be OK; go a bit faster if you are inherently a bit shakey.

If you use Ed's Budweiser tecvhnique, don't manual-focus as the ability to focus erodes fast under the influence

Chiva wrote in post #4921751
They used REAL photo TECHNIQUE, not laziness.

tripods, monopods, human tripods, walls to brace on, etc

Also, high speed film, noise was accepted back then, people are too fussy thesedays.

Oh please! Spare us all this luddite fantasy.

IS is a wonderful technology that allows the photographer to handhold the camera at shutter speeds slower than what they could get away with on their own. It works for good handholders and it works for bad ones....though the latter will not be able to go as slow.

This is a great technology. The ability to shoot long lenses handheld in less than ideal light coupled with the ability to change ISO on the fly and get clean high ISO images is a huge step forward.

If you really love noisy, blurry images then save your money. Get a Holga and shoot ASA 800 film and push it 4 stops. Should look fablulous.

But don't tell people buying modern cameras that they are lazy for using modern technology. Sheesh!

ed rader wrote in post #4921750
a 16 oz budweiser is worth one stop .

ed rader

OMG!! That is just plain genius!!!

Chiva wrote in post #4921751
They used REAL photo TECHNIQUE, not laziness.

tripods, monopods, human tripods, walls to brace on, etc

Also, high speed film, noise was accepted back then, people are too fussy thesedays.

Agreed.

Chiva wrote in post #4921751
They used REAL photo TECHNIQUE, not laziness.

tripods, monopods, human tripods, walls to brace on, etc

Yeah!

In fact - cameras? Bloody cheating.

We need to get back to daubing pictures of mammoths on cave walls, eh, Chiva?