| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/16/2006 09:42:48 AM · #1 |
Opinion poll...
In comparing the IS and NON IS versions of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L:
Do you find any difference in quality... or is the IS the ONLY difference. Personally I would prefer to spend $600 less for the non IS version and keep it on my tripod. But I wanted to check with people in the know. |
|
|
|
11/16/2006 09:50:33 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by santaspores:
Opinion poll...
In comparing the IS and NON IS versions of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L:
Do you find any difference in quality... or is the IS the ONLY difference. Personally I would prefer to spend $600 less for the non IS version and keep it on my tripod. But I wanted to check with people in the know. |
I believe the non-IS version is actually a sharper lens. So if "keeping it on a tripod" is an option for you, go for it. But for those of us that have to shoot "on the go", the IS is a god-send.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2006 10:09:41 AM · #3 |
|
|
|
11/16/2006 10:16:15 AM · #4 |
According to some reports, the non-IS verion is sharper. Question is, can this result be replicated, or is it due to sample variation? I'd guess there is a difference. there are several additional elements in the IS version.
The difference, if present, is minor, and will probably only be observable wide open and under controlled conditions. It might become important if you will use the lens with a teleconverter.
I should also mention that the IS system can have an impact on bokeh when turned on. Under conditions where there is linear detail in the background and the IS system moves significantly during the exposure, edges may appear doubled on some of the BG objects. This effect is not often problematic, but it does in fact exist. |
|
|
|
11/16/2006 10:21:02 AM · #5 |
One onther thing to consider, while the IS reduces the need for a tripod, it probabaly won't eliminate all together. I've read that you can not use the IS on a tripod. Something about the IS assumes some sort of movement and when movement isn't present it gets confused and can affect the picture.
I rented a 400 2.8 IS lens and the dealer went as far to say using this lens with IS on a tripod could damage the lens.
Something to consider.
Message edited by author 2006-11-16 10:24:34.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2006 10:23:10 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
...I've read that you can not use the IS on a tripod. Something about the IS assumes some sort of movement and when movement isn't present it gets confused and can affect the picture.
I rented a 400 2.0 IS lens and the dealer went as far to say using this lens with IS on a tripod could damage the lens.
Something to consider. |
This is true of first-generation IS. The 70-200 has 2nd-generation IS, which does not need to be turned off when on a tripod :-) |
|
|
|
11/16/2006 10:26:38 AM · #7 |
| Thanks all - good conversation. And Hopper - thanks again - I read that Luminous Landscape article (which by the way mentions that you do not need to turn off IS when using a tripod). I actually remember reading it before but forgot that info... I am afraid that I linked over to the 400mm DO and became absorbed... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/07/2026 03:51:59 AM EST.
