Is Image Stabilization worth the $$

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

09/25/2003 01:01:31 PM · #1

Dell has a great price on the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens, but it's still several hundered dollors more than the non-IS version. Does anybody know how well it works in real world situations and are there disadvantages. I've read some reviews, but they don't give me much of an impression of the real world advantages and disadvantages.

Thanks in advance...

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

09/25/2003 01:11:23 PM · #2

If you shoot a lot of handheld shots, especially in lower light, the IS would definitely be worth it. If you work from a tripod or don't work in lower light conditions, it may not be.

09/25/2003 01:15:56 PM · #3

It is totally worth it IMHO.

You need to understand what IS is and what it isn't. IS does not help stop fast action in low light. The only way to stop action is with fast shutter speeds. So it isn't going to help you capture a night sports game. (The 2.8 aperture will help in that regard compared to a "consumer" grade lens which might be at f/4.5 or f/5.6 at 200mm).

What IS does is permit you to take pictures when you would normally need a tripod to get solid results. It helps eliminate "camera shake", which becomes a bigger and bigger problem as your focal length increases. This means you can hand-hold the lens in situations where hand-holding would normally result in "blurry" images. For example, you want to photograph something not moving in a dimly lit room where tripods and flash are not allowed. It requires 1/30sec exposure. Trying to hand-hold the non-IS 70-200 and getting a good shot would be very challenging. With the IS lens, it would be no problem.

It is also great for hand-held panning shots, since it helps stabilize your pan vertically (there is a panning mode you can select on the lens to clue the IS sensors in to the fact that you are panning). Sample photo:

The 70-200/2.8 IS is my favorite lens, and I use the IS feature all the time (even in "daylight" lighting conditions) to ensure I'm not reducing image quality by adding "camera shake" to the image, since I often shoot hand-held (unless I'm doing a "setup" shot and have the luxury of setting up and positioning a tripod).

Message edited by author 2003-09-25 13:20:44.

09/25/2003 01:24:14 PM · #4

Great input, but I have two more questions...

One of the reasons I am interested in the lens is for more action oriented shots. I understand I need fast shutter speed for this, probably 1/250 and up. Is camera shake still a problem at this speed and will IS help.

Also, does the added complexity hurt the lens performance (sharpness, etc) in anyway.

Thanks again for the input, this is exactly the kind of real world experience I had hoped to find!

09/25/2003 01:26:56 PM · #5

one more thing... do you have a picture of the lens on the camera. The photo on canon's web site doesn't include a camera body as reference point, so I cannot get a good impression of the size.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/25/2003 01:34:27 PM · #6

Are you hand-holding at 1/250th? If so, then yes, IS can still be a help at those shutter speeds, unless you are really smooth with your ability to depress the shutter without moving the camera at all.

For web-sized pictures, the camera shake wouldn't likely to be too noticeable. But for the sharpest pictures, you want absolutely no motion while the shutter is open, regardless of how short that time is. The IS sensors and moveable lens elements work hard to counteract such motion.

In terms of hurting lens performance, not in my opinion. The sharpness of the 70-200 IS is nothing short of amazing. I'm not saying this is a great picture or even a good example (it is just a candid snapshot of my neice which I shot hand-held on the 4th of July -- a 50% reduction of the full-frame direct-from-10D image), but I personally am more than satisfied with the results.

I don't have a picture of the lens on the camera, since the 10D is my only camera. I did find this picture on pbase of the 70-200/f4, which is significantly smaller than than the 2.8 version. No doubt about it, the 2.8/IS is a large (especially with the included lens hood, which I always use), not-light lens at 3.25 pounds... but well worth it to me.

Message edited by author 2003-09-25 13:46:58.

Blurry

Canon PowerShot A40

09/25/2003 01:40:17 PM · #7

EddyG, beautiful photo, can the 300D do this with the right lens?

carsten

Canon EOS-5D

09/25/2003 01:52:15 PM · #8

Yes it´s absolutely worth the extra money. This photo is taken with the 70-200mm/2.8 IS lens. Handheld and with the camera following the players. And yes it IS big and yes it IS rather heavy but you get used to it. A monopod is just perfect.

09/25/2003 02:05:11 PM · #9

Blurry: I see no reason why the 300D wouldn't produce a similar quality image if you attached the 70-200/2.8 IS to it. But I haven't ever used a 300D, so I'm only saying that based on the fact that I've heard the 300D is for the most part a lower-cost 10D (due to plastic body, etc.)

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

09/25/2003 02:23:31 PM · #10

Plus sides : lets you hand hold shots at about 3 stops slower than you could normally

Down sides : If you are shooting people in low light, you'll get shots of blurry people with very crisp backgrounds. I.e., it doesn't help you stop motion
Makes the lens slightly heavier
Makes the lens use the battery faster when IS is on
Doesn't help much if you use a tripod (though it does for the 400mm+ lenses)

But if you don't use a tripod much, or take a lot of low-light shots with no living things in them, then it can be great.

I've shot with both the 70-200 2.8L IS and the 70-200 4L (no IS) and the 2.8L lens is significantly larger and more bulky (mostly due to the constant 2.8 aperture) IS is nice if it suits your shooting style, but I haven't found very many occasions when it would help with the way I shoot. It is very dependent on how you use a camera.

Message edited by author 2003-09-25 14:26:21.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

09/25/2003 02:24:17 PM · #11

where can i find this on the dell site

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

09/25/2003 02:27:19 PM · #12

Originally posted by EddyG:

Haven't seen this in any reviews, but does the 300D have a metal or plastic lens mount ? Some of the film Rebels have plastic mounts, which are prone to cracking which you stick the 'Luxury' range of heavy lenses on them.

09/25/2003 02:37:30 PM · #13

achiral: try here. I'm amazed the IS version is that cheap; I paid $400 more for mine!

Message edited by author 2003-09-25 14:43:34.

09/25/2003 02:40:55 PM · #14

Gordon: very good point about the plastic lens mount. If that is the case, I'd be very hesitant to hang almost 3.5 pounds of expensive glass from a plastic mount... I frequently carry my 10D (via Op/Tech Pro-Strap over my shoulder) with the 70-200/2.8IS mounted without worry.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

09/25/2003 02:42:09 PM · #15

and they are having 10% off software and peripherals right now

which would bring this down to $1169 can this be possible? i might order one tonight or tomorrow if so

bod

09/25/2003 03:07:19 PM · #16

Originally posted by Gordon:

The 300D has a metal mount.

09/25/2003 04:22:28 PM · #17

Originally posted by achiral:

and they are having 10% off software and peripherals right now

which would bring this down to $1169 can this be possible? i might order one tonight or tomorrow if so

I just ordered one for $1169.96 before shipping. The 10% disconnect is for online purchases, but the lens is not visable unless you go in as part of a special group like health care or education... but then you have to pay sales tax because they have local reps. I called Dell and said I could not find the product online and asked if I could still get the 10% discount. It took a few minutes, but they found the lens and got approval for the additional 10% discount.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

09/25/2003 05:23:21 PM · #18

damn they already took the lens off their website...

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

09/25/2003 06:11:18 PM · #19

Originally posted by achiral:

damn they already took the lens off their website...

I ordered just before my last post and at that point it was still visible with the link provided by EddyG. I place my order on the phone and said I could not find it on the web site but that a friend had just ordered it. They looked it up based on the canon part number and let me order. It may still be worth a try.

bod

09/26/2003 07:03:10 AM · #20

Looks like Dell f$%^ed up with this one
//www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/48445/0

magnetic9999

Canon EOS-20D

09/26/2003 07:40:16 AM · #21

I absolutely love IS. I don't think it's as worth paying for in the shorter lenses if you're on a budget but in the longer lenses it makes a difference.

For example my 3rd placed entry in the Life challenge "Life Spreads Its Wings"was shot using that lens at 300mm, in heavily overcast conditions.