| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/12/2005 06:44:16 PM · #26 |
This example is taken with the 100-400 IS, with the IS on with the lens resting on the cill of a hide (same effect as a tripod). There are some real wierd effects in the bokeh
Woodpecker
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 12:39:44 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Falc:
This example is taken with the 100-400 IS, with the IS on with the lens resting on the cill of a hide (same effect as a tripod). There are some real wierd effects in the bokeh
Woodpecker |
This problem no longer occurs with lenses using IS v2 (on the market since spring2004. ISV2 no longer compensates for "lack of movement" as did the original IS. |
|
|
|
04/13/2005 12:44:49 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Gil P:
Originally posted by Falc:
This example is taken with the 100-400 IS, with the IS on with the lens resting on the cill of a hide (same effect as a tripod). There are some real wierd effects in the bokeh
Woodpecker |
This problem no longer occurs with lenses using IS v2 (on the market since spring2004. ISV2 no longer compensates for "lack of movement" as did the original IS. |
To answer both of you posts...
This problem is not a function of the IS operating when there is no movement, as on a tripod. In most cases where this is seen, the subject is clear (IS has done its job properly) but the BG shows the "IS bokeh" effect. It's also not necessary for the exposure to be very long, just for it to be slow enough for significant IS movement to be necessary to keep the subject motionless in the frame.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 01:09:31 PM · #29 |
Can anyone post a sample of this bad bokeh where it happens with IS on and then goes away once the IS has been turned off and the shot has been repeated under the same conditions. There is a lot of talk about IS causing bokeh problems and pictures posted of crummy looking bokeh but I haven̢۪t really seen any compelling evidence that it was the IS that caused the problem.
The reason I am making this request is that since reading this thread I have been trying to run such a test but have not been able to create the problem with IS on and make it go away once the IS has been turned off.
I am really starting to wonder if this is just the result of the optical design of the lenses or if it really is the IS causing the bokeh effect.
Tom
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 02:13:51 PM · #30 |
Tom,
Your question is exactly the thing I want to test. I've never taken the time to do it in a real structured manner, with a set-up that is repeatable and readily shows the problem. It looks like the weather will be good the rest of the week, so I hope to actually do it, maybe Friday.
I plan on testing both with an IS-equipped lens (70-200) with IS on and IS off, and also using a lens without IS (Canon 100/2.8 or Canon 24-70?). I'm leaning toward the 24-70 since it's image quality is ver similar to the 70-200. That would limit me to testing at 70mm.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 02:39:20 PM · #31 |
I am really looking forward to seeing your results.
Thanks,
Tom |
|
|
|
04/13/2005 02:45:01 PM · #32 |
Lack of difference - that may be as someone commented, that newere lenses as of a couple years ago no longer have said problem. Perhaps, the ones which exhibit such problems were cause they were IS and IS 2.0
*shrug* |
|
|
|
04/13/2005 02:46:43 PM · #33 |
The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS shuts off the IS when it is on a tripod.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 02:48:26 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Lack of difference - that may be as someone commented, that newere lenses as of a couple years ago no longer have said problem. Perhaps, the ones which exhibit such problems were cause they were IS and IS 2.0
*shrug* |
In that case my 70-200, which is the latest generation IS and is less than a year old should not show the effect. It does, however.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 03:07:43 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by laurielblack:
kirbic honey...put down the slide rule and back away from the protractor...and no one will get hurt. ;o) |
Never, NEVER I tell you! They'll get my HP 15C when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers! [kirbic backs away with a wild-eyed look]
|
You know you need one of these.
And I think if you need XML tags to confine your humour, then maybe it isn't really funny, just true ? |
|
|
|
04/13/2005 03:16:01 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by laurielblack:
kirbic honey...put down the slide rule and back away from the protractor...and no one will get hurt. ;o) |
Never, NEVER I tell you! They'll get my HP 15C when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers! [kirbic backs away with a wild-eyed look]
|
You know you need one of these. |
O yeh, that's waht I'm talkin' about! Now if only it was a Citizen Eco-Drive, I'd be all over it!
Originally posted by Gordon:
And I think if you need XML tags to confine your humour, then maybe it isn't really funny, just true ? |
For a moment there, I thought you were going to suggest that I'm a member of the AARP... Association of Anal-Retentive Posters :-)
|
|
|
|
04/13/2005 03:18:33 PM · #37 |
The lens I am using is an older lens EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS that has one of the older versions of IS.
Tom
Originally posted by theSaj:
Lack of difference - that may be as someone commented, that newere lenses as of a couple years ago no longer have said problem. Perhaps, the ones which exhibit such problems were cause they were IS and IS 2.0
*shrug* |
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/17/2025 04:50:46 AM EDT.
