IS vs Non IS lenses

[Chuck Lee]

My next question is should I still get the 70-200mm f/2.8 or go with the 70-200mm f/4 and save a few more bucks?

don (pause for effect) man,


That's entirely dependent on your shooting goals. If you are going to shoot B-Ball inside a Gym, f4 may be pushing it. However, the difference between the f4 and f2.8IS would almost be enough to upgrade to a refurbed 40D or used 50D. Then you would at least have the ISO 3200 +1EV advantage over the XSi you currently own. If your very happy with your XSi then you simply need to decide what you think you will need for the kind of photography you want to do. Both lenses are phenomenal pieces of glass.


If you want to shoot sports then you need the AF advantage that the XXD cameras have over your current body and that may be a bigger advantage at f4 than the XSi at f2.8. At f2.8 the DOF is pretty thin and sharply focused action shots will be harder to produce with the XSi. I have never owned an XSi so I don't know anything about it's autofocus speed. I assume that it's not as fast or as accurate as the XXD's. Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong.


I find that with the 5D & 40D, my keeper percentage increases if I use ISO 3200 f4 instead of ISO 1600 f2.8 when shooting basketball indoors. (My son's Upward pee-wee basketball) OKay, so why would I buy the f2.8 version. Because I happened across agreat deal and I shoota lotin natural/low light situations like church and weddings where flash would/could be distracting. I use f2.8 as much if not morethan f4.


That'stwo more Abes.........[]

[BCalkins]

It is also worth mentioning that the 70-200 has two IS modes. The 2nd allows for side to side panning with the IS correcting for only the vertical camera shake. This can help with shots where the subject motion is side to side.


At the 70mm end of the zoom the IS is almost never useful for moving subjects, in my opinion. By the time IS is getting useful (under 1/100s) you are already getting subject motion blur. Being able to shoot at 1/30s or 1/15s won't help if the subject is moving. I would take a f/2.8 non-IS over a f/4 IS for shooting sports...

[DavidEccleston]

Another consideration is that the IS may not be the only difference between the two lenses. Looking at Bryan's magic mouse-over ISO chart comparing the 70-200mm F4 L IS vs. the non-IS version, itshows a massive improvement in image quality in the IS lens. Since the poor results on the non-IS lens can be seen across 3 camera bodies, it's probably not just a fluke. I checked at 70, 135, and 200mm. While the difference is much less at 200mm, there is massive amount of blur in the non-IS lens at lower focal lengths.

[Dallasphotog]

Nice shots - That is exactly what Im looking to get especially the second shot. It appears he was clear across the field from you, not to mention dark out. Now, was that taken with or without a flash? The first shot is great in that I will be able to capture the facial expressions as well.


So, Im guessing that you think the IS is well worth the extra money? Im still not sure about it, especially if I use a monopod. I think Im leaning towards the non IS which will allow me some extra money to invest in a 2nd lens such as the 100mm I mentioned earlier.


Im so conflicted...lol, I dont want to buy the non-IS and then wish I had bought the IS. What to do, what to do????
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

The second shot is about 2/3 of the way across the field...and it was shot without flash. I haven't found evry many sporting events where flash is effective.


I really like the IS a lot. I handhold wedding pictures in dark churches and it just makes me a better photographer. As for sports, I think it saves me when I'm bouncing around trying to move and shoot at the same time.

[Dallasphotog]

Just to add a datapoint, I recently rented the amazing Canon 200mm f/2 IS lens. I went to Kerry Park in Seattle, and shot views of Seattle. Go here to see a wide-angle perspective, a telephoto perspective, and a crop of the detail in the telephoto shot. The wide angle shot was 5 seconds long, with the camera on a ledge for stability. The telephoto shot was handheld, and was only made possible with IS.


http://community.the-digital-picture.com/forums/t/2021.aspx?PageIndex=2


I'm a believer in IS.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

I want to see a bunch of those pictures from the EF200 f/2.0...I keep telling my daughter we need it for basketball season.

[Dallasphotog]

(edit) In response to the two photos by Dallasphotog:


I would like to point out that IS was not necessary for either shot. When shooting sports, 1/250 or faster shutter speeds are needed to freeze motion. At 200mm the IS would not be necessary until 1/200 or less.


The second image could have been taken at ISO 3200, f4.0, 1/800 or ISO 1600, f4.0, 1/400 or ISO 1600, f5.6, 1/200 (with IS) At that shutter speed the action begins to blur. This can add drama to an otherwise standard sports shot and that's where IS becomes a tool rather than a crutch.


So the point was......? [img]/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]


Dallas, you provedin that particular scenerioIS was not necessary and graciously illustrated how high ISO DSLRs should be reducing the demand for IS rather than bolstering it. Thank you!


I own the original 70-200 f2.8L. It works great for me. Are there times when I wish it had IS? Yes, the 5D has a 1/200 flash sync speed and when trying to blend flash and ambient at 120 - 200mm I have to be very careful whenshooting handheld. I would also like to be able to do artistic motion blur shutter drags. That would be fun. I would say that 99% of the time thoughthe non-IS gives me everything I need. I bought it used at a local camera store for 900 USD. It had just come back from the Canon repair shop and still had warranty time. It is my go to portrait lens.


IMHO, it is hard to justify IS for any lens less than 200mm. I will hold my opinion on the new 100 Macro until there's more evidence collected for how the IS made the shot "more possible". I know I'm in the minority on that view but it's my money and my right to be stingy with it.......[img]/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]



<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Sure.What I was trying to show was the results you can get with the lens shooting football. Now, if you want to see the miracles of IS, check this out. I can't come close to holding a non-IS lens this cleanly at 1/30.





Canon XTi, Canon EF70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM, Av, 135mm, F/2.8, ISO-400, 1/30

[Ehcalum]

Sure.What I was trying to show was the results you can get with the lens shooting football. Now, if you want to see the miracles of IS, check this out. I can't come close to holding a non-IS lens this cleanly at 1/30.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Sure you can. The flash, namely if you use read curtain sync will help to sharpen the subject. Its also a matter of proper holding and bracing techniques.

[Chuck Lee]

I can't come close to holding a non-IS lens this cleanly at 1/30.

Then why do it? All it would take would be for her move a little and that picture would be ruined. I certainly would not try this during a wedding unless I was absolutely maxed out on the highest ISO I could trust. In very difficult situations, it would be awesome to have. But that's not the point. It's awesome to have and if I were making a living as a photographer I wouldn't hesitate but I don't think that is donnman's interest. I believe Dallas that you are making a living and for you the best of the best is exactly what you need. For donnman, I think many of us here believe that it is an unecessary expenditure.


I can't tell if the catch light is a window or flash with modifyer, but if this is flash all bets are off on the 1/30th handheld. I would then agree with with Ehcalum, it could be done at 1/135 on non IS, no prob.


If I were shooting that, I'd have my 5D set to ISO 800, f2.8, 1/160 135mm on 70-200 with bounce flash and get the similar results.


That is a beautiful shot and I do not want to take away from that.


Good Discussion.......[]

[donnman]

I just want to say thanks to all who commented and offered their opinions. This is why I love this site...I still havent made my final decision but I think Im going with the non IS 70-200mm f/2.8


On a side note, one of the pictures I posted was purchased by our local newspaper. So, I guess that I am officially a freelance sports photographer now. They have asked me to take some more shots and have issued me a press badge....pretty exciting for me. I was hoping to make a few bucks on the side and now it appears that I may have that opportunity.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.00/East-vs-Clio.JPG[/img]


The picture above is the one that they published along with a story about the game. It is so cool to see your work in the paper. My wife and daughter want to start a scrapbook for me...lol

[Chuck Lee]

On a side note, one of the pictures I posted was purchased by our local newspaper

That's absolutely fantastic donnman!!