| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/25/2007 03:37:53 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
Is image stabilization all it's cracked up to be and do you really get a couple extra stops out of it? Does it degrade image quality at all?
For example, two similar lenses are about the same cost:
70-200 F/4 IS USM
70-200 F/2.8 USM
With IS, wouldn't you be able to theoretically go lower than 2/8? |
Just to go back and clarify something - the lowest f-stop on that IS lens is 4.0. IS lets you shoot at a slower shutter speed at all apertures, but it doesn't change the max. aperture.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2007 05:12:15 PM · #27 |
| I have the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS and I love it to death. Best combination of fast lens, great clarity and IS to boot! I love the IS because It really helps me get a steady shot since I handhold everything that I do. My friend was playing with my camera one day and switched off the IS to see how it worked and I took about 50 shots with it off. I was looking through them and wondering why the heck all of them were blurry and realized that the IS was off. Even though it is a fast lens, the IS really does make a difference depending on the situation and definitely makes all of my handheld pics sharper. I dont think I'll ever buy another lens without it. |
|
|
|
07/25/2007 05:21:48 PM · #28 |
I agree, the 17-55 is seeminly a sweet deal... but it's EF-S, so there's no 5D in its future. Which is maybe fine - I just like to dream that someday I'll go full frame. =)
When Canon announces the EF 24-105mm f2.8 IS, I'm so there with my 5D... well, naturally assuming I win the lottery in the mean time. |
|
|
|
07/25/2007 05:35:32 PM · #29 |
| as has been stated it depends on what you shoot. my primary lens is the 17-85 IS and I love it. I bought the Tamron 17-50 2.8, used it twice and am now selling it. I don't need 2.8 most of the time (really never) but the Is helps me loads since i don't use a tripod that often. Although i do have another 2.8 and a 1.8 lens if it came down to really needing the extra stops. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 02:00:18 PM · #30 |
| I bought the 50mm 1.8 and never use it... I think I'm going to sell it because I just really think that the 17-55 does everything that I want it to. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 02:12:20 PM · #31 |
I regularly use the 2.8 on my Tammy. I mainly use it to shrink the DOF when in tight conditions and of course to raise that shutter speed. I'm a huge fan of the fast glass, the slowest lens I own is f/4 constant (helps that I only have 3 lenses :P) and that will be getting upgraded next year to f/2.8 constant. To me, IS is trivial unless you have a very long lens you want to use. With that said, I'd take the 24-70 f/2.8L over the 24-105 f/4L IS. And I'd save myself the $700 and get the 70-200 f/2.8L non-IS over the IS. But once you hit the 300mm+ mark, IS is very useful. Having both fast and IS is great, but it'll hit your wallet like a freight train goin 80mph. For example: Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS...$1000?!?!?! Granted it's an amazing lens, but is IS really that useful at that range? I'm not sure, I've never used the thing, just a question. If there was a Canon 17-55mm (or similar) f/2.8 lens that didn't have IS, would you opt for that instead? If it were me, I'd just crank the ISO (that's why you bought that SLR right?) up a stop or two and get myself a 1/50th shutter speed and save hundreds of dollars on top of it. Just my opinion, results may vary.
|
|
|
|
07/26/2007 03:57:50 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
How do you guys feel about IS for moving subjects? |
Heh I was tracking an airplane with a 100-400L IS that i was borrowing. Each time you try to center the Aircraft in the shot (you physically moving) the lense compensated for my moving. It was like fighting the lense to center my subject.
Remember you can turn the IS off. |
That lens has 2 modes of IS. Mode 2 is used if panning. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 03:59:15 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
How do you guys feel about IS for moving subjects? |
Heh I was tracking an airplane with a 100-400L IS that i was borrowing. Each time you try to center the Aircraft in the shot (you physically moving) the lense compensated for my moving. It was like fighting the lense to center my subject.
Remember you can turn the IS off. |
That lens has 2 modes of IS. Mode 2 is used if panning. |
Thanks, i mentioned that in another post and it was also covered there after! Wasnt my lens first time action! |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 04:02:20 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
How do you guys feel about IS for moving subjects? |
Heh I was tracking an airplane with a 100-400L IS that i was borrowing. Each time you try to center the Aircraft in the shot (you physically moving) the lense compensated for my moving. It was like fighting the lense to center my subject.
Remember you can turn the IS off. |
That lens has 2 modes of IS. Mode 2 is used if panning. |
Thanks, i mentioned that in another post and it was also covered there after! Wasnt my lens first time action! |
Mode 2 was mentioned but how you described the effect showed you weren't using it. Comparing it to the 28-135 (which only has one mode) shows it was set to mode 1. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 04:08:23 PM · #35 |
As i said i had no clue, I saw switches and im like ooooh switches j/k. Its not something i needed IS for ISO 400 film in broad daylight the shutter speeds fast enough. I think the best mode is off!
Of course with the pentax, its a different story lol. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 05:15:27 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Larus:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The IS does nothing if your subject is moving. |
Exactly. I take bigger aperture over IS any day of the week. Of course both is better and I find the IS on the 70-200 sometimes very helpful but I would for example never exchange the 24-70 for the 24-105 IS lens. |
I'd say it depends on "moving".
When you're zoomed in to 200mm, even a little jostle will ruin the image, however a 1/100 is enough to freeze most subject movement - it just can't compensate for barrel movement. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 05:42:47 PM · #37 |
One problem with tracking an airplane is that it is possible it isn't horizontal tracking. If you are tracking at some angle to the horizon the lens isn't going to known what to do in panning mode. I believe panning mode is used for horizontal panning. You couldn't, for example, pan vertically and shoot something falling off a building.
Am I incorrect? Even if you can do vertical as well, I highly doubt you could do a diagonal pan.
Message edited by author 2007-07-26 17:42:59.
|
|
|
|
07/26/2007 08:05:36 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
... You couldn't, for example, pan vertically and shoot something falling off a building.
Am I incorrect? Even if you can do vertical as well, I highly doubt you could do a diagonal pan. |
If shooting in portrait mode it may work. Diagonal probably wouldn't though. |
|
|
|
07/26/2007 08:17:49 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
When you're zoomed in to 200mm, even a little jostle will ruin the image, however a 1/100 is enough to freeze most subject movement - it just can't compensate for barrel movement. |
Which is what shooting film makes fun, ISO 800 film at 1/6000 a sec in broad daylight lol! |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 03:24:39 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Seems like most people are in favor of faster glass, so I'll play the devil's advocate.
At 200mm or 400mm even, IS can be the difference between handheld and tripod. Recall that a safe handhold speed is 1/focal length or 1/200 to 1/400 (depending on which lens we are talking about). If you can get 2 stops out of the IS then you can shoot down to 1/50th-1/100th (with 2 stops). The 2.8 may not be able to compensate that much and you may find that handheld you are constrained to using the wide open apertures only. What happens if you want to shoot at f/8 or f/11? The IS helps this happen in handheld, the fast lens does nothing for you. f/8 is the same on a 2.8 as a 4.0.
Just pointing this out. I like fast glass too, but I also like IS. The argument always comes up because the answer is "yes". Both have their uses. The uses are different. |
Yup, IS is good for some things. Like group shots (where you want a wider DOF) taken in shade, or indoors (e.g. shots of your kid at a school play or choral group or other activity.) |
|
