to IS or not?


Status
Not open for further replies.

cyanwater

New Member
Nov 23, 2004
225
0
0
I'm aiming the Canon 70-200 f4L. Now the question is if it's worth it to spend $700+- more to get the copy with IS.

Weight and portability is important so the 70-200 f2.8 is out.

I'll be shooting candids with it mostly. Occasionally, basketball games(sometimes at indoor court). I know the f2.8 would be more ideal for sports but shooting sports is not the main reason for the purchase. I'm wondering does the IS help with 4 stops compensation in this case? Or the f4 is simply incompetent for indoor sports, regardless if it has IS or not?

Your vote and advice are greatly appreciated! Thanks! ;)
 

miniUltraman

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2006
2,747
0
0
IS is calling.. you should have no regrets ;)
 

FilterFunk

Senior Member
Apr 1, 2006
2,736
0
0
卧龙岗
IS will not help to freeze motion, IS is designed to counter handshake, and hence, i had tried to shoot using f4 indoors and it performs sluggishly.

just my 0.02..
 

miniUltraman

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2006
2,747
0
0
the f4L IS is pretty good though.. I compared the F4 and F4 IS in a restaurant (quite dim).. trying to shoot a table number (place vertically) from afar... @200mm.. no matter how I support my elbows on the table.. there is deem to have camera shake.. (shutter at around 1/8).. the IS gives me good results though!!! I am amazed.. sold my f4 2 days after that :bsmilie:
 

renzero

Member
Dec 10, 2004
132
0
16
the f4L IS is pretty good though.. I compared the F4 and F4 IS in a restaurant (quite dim).. trying to shoot a table number (place vertically) from afar... @200mm.. no matter how I support my elbows on the table.. there is deem to have camera shake.. (shutter at around 1/8).. the IS gives me good results though!!! I am amazed.. sold my f4 2 days after that :bsmilie:
Agreed.. IS is good... i am amazed by how 24-105 f/4L IS perform.. better than my previous 17-40 f4L or maybe even 24-70 F2.8L imho. :D
 

adamadam

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2004
3,643
1
38
36
Perth
www.flickr.com
Buy the IS version, and turn it off when you want the non-IS version :p
(same goes with the f/2.8 IS version, if you want it to become f/4 non IS, just stop it down and turn off IS - but it won't beat the f/4's weight and portability - of which weight should not be an issue anyway - overused excuse).

The thing here is... do you really want to pay 700 more for IS? Perhaps you could use that 700 to buy another lens, maybe a 85mm f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4, very fast and good quality.

I only own 2 lenses with IS, and I'm very happy that they have IS! Sometimes it can come in very handy!
 

miniUltraman

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2006
2,747
0
0
Buy the IS version, and turn it off when you want the non-IS version :p
(same goes with the f/2.8 IS version, if you want it to become f/4 non IS, just stop it down and turn off IS - but it won't beat the f/4's weight and portability - of which weight should not be an issue anyway - overused excuse).

The thing here is... do you really want to pay 700 more for IS? Perhaps you could use that 700 to buy another lens, maybe a 85mm f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4, very fast and good quality.

I only own 2 lenses with IS, and I'm very happy that they have IS! Sometimes it can come in very handy!
I tried 17-55mmf2.8 IS at 50mm and 50mm f1.4.. errr.. I like the 17-55 IS :thumbsup: :thumbsup: making the aperture wider than 2.8 may have very shallow DOF.. sometimes it just doesn't work on portrait...
 

cyanwater

New Member
Nov 23, 2004
225
0
0
Seems like most people are supporting the IS. :sweat:

Buy the IS version, and turn it off when you want the non-IS version :p
(same goes with the f/2.8 IS version, if you want it to become f/4 non IS, just stop it down and turn off IS - but it won't beat the f/4's weight and portability - of which weight should not be an issue anyway - overused excuse).

The thing here is... do you really want to pay 700 more for IS? Perhaps you could use that 700 to buy another lens, maybe a 85mm f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4, very fast and good quality.

I only own 2 lenses with IS, and I'm very happy that they have IS! Sometimes it can come in very handy!
Pardon my ignorance, what kind of situation will you switch off the IS?
 

calebk

Senior Member
Jul 25, 2006
10,587
0
0
Clementi
Seems like most people are supporting the IS. :sweat:



Pardon my ignorance, what kind of situation will you switch off the IS?
To save battery when you're shooting in bright sunlight, with shutter speeds in excess of above 1/200.
 

DingDongBell

New Member
Jun 3, 2006
41
0
0
Damn! I thought I could convince myself that my 70-200/4 is good enough, and you guys had to start this thread?! :)

To save battery when you're shooting in bright sunlight, with shutter speeds in excess of above 1/200.
There's no guarantee you won't shake above 1/200. ;p I think it's good idea to just leave IS on when handholding.

Maybe can switch IS off when mounted on tripod and battery life is a concern, e.g. long hours of operation like when staking out as a PI, you're stalking someone or if you're a bird-stalker :bsmilie: , even though the newer generation of IS do not have problems when mounted on tripod.
 

DingDongBell

New Member
Jun 3, 2006
41
0
0
I'm aiming the Canon 70-200 f4L. Now the question is if it's worth it to spend $700+- more to get the copy with IS.

Weight and portability is important so the 70-200 f2.8 is out.

I'll be shooting candids with it mostly. Occasionally, basketball games(sometimes at indoor court). I know the f2.8 would be more ideal for sports but shooting sports is not the main reason for the purchase. I'm wondering does the IS help with 4 stops compensation in this case? Or the f4 is simply incompetent for indoor sports, regardless if it has IS or not?

Your vote and advice are greatly appreciated! Thanks! ;)
Maybe before you go and spend the $700+, re-examine all the photos you took with your 70-200/4 and see how many shots were spoiled by camera shake. In my case, most spoiled shots were due to motion blur, which would suggest I need a faster lens and camera capable of higher ISO.

Another way is to shoot what you normally shoot with this lens, but mount your cam on a tripod (to simulate IS). See if u're happy with the results.

Another question you could ask yourself is how important is the Zoom to you? Would a fast prime lens (85/1.8, 135/2) serve your needs better? Fix your 70-200 at 85mm (tape the zoom ring) and then at 135mm to try out if you could live with fixed focal length. :cool:

I'm pretty sure the 85mm and 135mm won't lose out to the 70-200 when it comes to AF performance and sharpness/contrast, not to mention excellent bokeh when you need it. These 2 are proven wonders, and together costs only about same amount as a new 70-200/4 IS. Yes, the 70-200/4 IS IS overpriced, just like the 24-105 was when it was launched.
 

ndroo

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 22, 2003
8,242
3
38
51
www.fuzzyeyeballs.com
www.fuzzyeyeballs.com
I'm aiming the Canon 70-200 f4L. Now the question is if it's worth it to spend $700+- more to get the copy with IS.

Weight and portability is important so the 70-200 f2.8 is out.

I'll be shooting candids with it mostly. Occasionally, basketball games(sometimes at indoor court). I know the f2.8 would be more ideal for sports but shooting sports is not the main reason for the purchase. I'm wondering does the IS help with 4 stops compensation in this case? Or the f4 is simply incompetent for indoor sports, regardless if it has IS or not?

Your vote and advice are greatly appreciated! Thanks! ;)
It's great to have IS ... but for $700 more ... for me, I'd rather spend it on something else
 

miniUltraman

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2006
2,747
0
0
I think if you have decided on a 70-200 f4L, go for the IS version... Otherwise you end up regreting why you didn't go for IS.. and sold it off and replace.. then you will spend more eventually... But if you already using a non-IS version.. then hold your gun :bsmilie:
 

miniUltraman

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2006
2,747
0
0
The f4 IS is the sharpest 70-200 amongst the 70-200mm series.
Is there any report on this? 70-200f2.8 IS owners will haunt you :bsmilie: they are paying more than 1k more :sweat:
 

adamadam

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2004
3,643
1
38
36
Perth
www.flickr.com
Have you tried out the lenses?
Maybe borrow a friend's for a while and see if it suits you.

I was deciding between lenses last time, and my mind was set once I had the chance to try them both :) (but sometimes I wish I could have the other as well)
 

nemo

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2003
2,818
0
36
Woodlands
Visit site
Is there any report on this? 70-200f2.8 IS owners will haunt you :bsmilie: they are paying more than 1k more :sweat:
taken from
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

"The non-IS 70-200 f/4 is similarly sharp in the center over the mid and long portion of the focal length range, but the f/4 IS is sharper in the center through 85mm or so and is noticeably sharper in the corners over most of the focal length range. These two lenses are most similar at 200mm. These differences are reduced as the subject distance is increased (the non-IS lens performs more similarly to the IS lens). The f/4 IS and f/2.8 IS 70-200mm L lenses are similarly sharp at the same aperture and focal length settings. "
 

Status
Not open for further replies.