IS vs Non IS lenses

[donnman]

I have yet to pull the trigger on my new lens.


Can someone please tell me the main difference between IS and non IS, besides the price. I have gotten mixed answers in regard to spending the extra $ on IS. Many people have told me that it really is not needed, especially for the kinds of photos Im taking.


Im just so confused. The pictures I take are mostly family shots and sports shots of my kids. They are both in high school and are involved in football, swimming, baseball, cheer, and competitive cheer. Lots of indoor low light shots as well as some night time outside shooting.


Im looking to buy a good zoom lens such as the 70-200 f/2.8, but this is where I dont know if it is worth spending the extra money on IS. I currently have the XSi body, kit lens, and my 50mm lens from my old film canon camera.


I'm thinking that if I dont get the IS then I could get another lens like the 100mm f/2.0 or is the IS worth the money and it is something that I should have.


I have attached a couple of photos that I took the other night. As you can see I have access to the field and as long as the play is near a sideline I can get a pretty good shot. But when they are out in the middle of the field or Im behind the end zone then it is tough to get a good shot with just the 50mm lens.


Please be kind about the photos as I am still learning how to use the camera. This is a huge step up for me from the point and shoot camera.


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


The above was a play near me on the sideline. It was taken with my XSi and the canon 100mm f/1.4 lens. I adjusted the size so I could include it here as the original was quite large.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.00/East-Field-goal-attempt.JPG[/img]


Taken with the same 50mm lens but with no zoom it is hard to get a great shot.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.00/East-on-the-march-_2D00_-from-behind-the-end-zone.JPG[/img]


Another shot with the 50mm from behind the end zone.


Would having an IS lens been of great benefit for me on these. I know I need a good telephoto like the 70-200mm but should I spend the extra bucks for IS?


Please help!!!!

[donnman]

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


The above was a play near me on the sideline. It was taken with my XSi and the canon 100mm f/1.4 lens.



<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Meant to say Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens NOT the 100mm.

[hotsecretary]

If you plan to use a tripod or possibly a monopod you can save yourself the $$.


The 70-200 2.8 IS is a wonderful lens I love mine a lot.. but it's a heavy beast


But if you can sit down, enjoy the sports and use a monopod you should be able to get away with the 2.8 non IS... my 2 cents.

[Dallasphotog]

I use my EF70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM for a lot of my sports coverage. Even if the EF300 f/2.8 or EF400 f/2.8 is my primary lens for the day, I always have the 70-200 close at hand. I think you will like the lens a lot.


I find the IS very useful in situations where the lighting is less than optimal. I have a non IS EF300 f/4.0 and I can't hand hold it slower than about 1/200. With the IS on, I havehand hand held the 70-200 at 1/60 and even 1/30 and been very happy with the results.


I think the confusion comes from the capabilities of IS. IS doesn't help a bit with motion blur casued by a moving subject. If your football players are in full stride, you'll still need a shutter speed fast enough to stop the motion. Its real purpose is to eliminate the motions induced by the photographer. If you are rock solid or shoot from a tripod, IS won'tprovide a lot of benefit. If you're like me and shooting from a monopod or hand held and potentially trying to step over a fallen line judge while keeping the wide receiever perfectly composed, you'll appreciate the benefits of IS.

[donnman]

Thanks Dallas...you are correct, I am confused about what IS actually will help with. So basically it will help me create a steadier hand for my shots, so to speak. Using a tripod or in some cases even a monopod, I probably wont see much if any difference. But is with the hand held shots, maybe walking or strong wind, whatever makes my hand unsteady, this is where I will see improved results.


Do I have the concept of IS down now?


Sorry for all the questions, I do appreciate all the information though!!

[Sean Setters]

Thanks Dallas...you are correct, I am confused about what IS actually will help with. So basically it will help me create a steadier hand for my shots, so to speak. Using a tripod or in some cases even a monopod, I probably wont see much if any difference. But is with the hand held shots, maybe walking or strong wind, whatever makes my hand unsteady, this is where I will see improved results.


Do I have the concept of IS down now?


Sorry for all the questions, I do appreciate all the information though!!

Yes, that is basically correct.

[peety3]

Thanks Dallas...you are correct, I am confused about what IS actually will help with. So basically it will help me create a steadier hand for my shots, so to speak. Using a tripod or in some cases even a monopod, I probably wont see much if any difference. But is with the hand held shots, maybe walking or strong wind, whatever makes my hand unsteady, this is where I will see improved results.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

The longer (more telephoto) the lens, the faster you'll need the shutter speed to avoid shake blur. Sometimes, the only answer to that problem is aperture. I tell people to look at their pictures and assess what's blurry - if the whole picture is blurry, IS might be the answer; if the subject is blurry, wider aperture (or higher ISO) is more likely the answer.


From a mathematical perspective, normal rule of thumb for handholding is 1/&lt;effective-focal-length&gt; (where EFL is lens focal length x camera crop factor). With a 2-stop IS unit (first generation), this becomes 4/EFL. 3-stop IS unit becomes 8/EFL, and the newest 4-stop IS units become 16/EFL as the rule of thumb. A 70-200 lens is somewhat in the middle - on a crop camera, 1/320th might be doable except in low light, but a 400/5.6 (at 1/640th) ends up with a handhold "requirement" faster than typical stop-action needs.

[donnman]

Thanks peety,


Unfortunately a lot of your post is to technical for me as I am just learning about this camera. As I stated this is a step up for me from a point and shoot, so you lost me with most of your last paragraph

[peety3]

On the zoom ring of your lens, it'll tell you what focal length you're at. On non-zoom ("prime") lenses, the lens should still tell you what focal length you're at.


Your Rebel body has a 1.6x "crop factor", so every lens you use has an effective focal length that's 1.6 times the focal length you see on the lens itself.


If shutter speed doesn't matter to the artistic/creative aspect of your pictures and you are shooting handheld, any particular focal length lens (combined with a particular camera) needs a certain shutter speed (or faster) to minimize/eliminate blurriness due to camera shake. A 50mm lens on your camera needs a shutter speed of 1/80th of a second or faster. A 200mm lens on your camera needs a shutter speed of 1/320th of a second. A 500mm lens on your camera needs a shutter speed of 1/800th of a second.


If there isn't enough light (aperture and ISO factor in here; we'll save their influences for other threads) to get shutter speeds as fast as the above guidelines, IS can help you out. The 70-200/2.8IS lens reportedly has a 3-stop IS unit. Therefore, at 70mm focal length you'd need a shutter speed of 1/14th of a second with IS, and at 200mm focal length you'd need 1/40th. For non-action shots, this can make or break your shots.


For action sports photography, 1/500th is a typical guideline for getting crisp action shots, so in those cases IS won't really matter. In a nutshell, if you aren't getting shutter speeds fast enough for stop action, you'd want to increase the ISO setting and/or open the aperture setting of the lens wider.


Consider getting a copy of Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. It should explain the creative/artistic aspects of small/large apertures and slow/fast shutter speeds for you quite well.

[Triple Black 88]

I do a lot of hand held sports photography, so were sort of in the same boat. Most of my kids'soccer/baseballgames start at 6:00 at night, so it isn't dark but dusk, especially towards the end of the game. Of course the B-Ball games are in doors. I should point out that I take all shots hand-held. I aso take a lot of indoor pics of the kids, birthday party pics, sunsets,etc... I guess what I'm trying to say is that these are all considered low light situations. I should also take a moment to tell you that I rarely use the flash unlessI absolutely have to. This is where the IS really comes in handy and will save a ton of shots. IMO it's a must! In broad daylight or if your going to use a tri/monopod it's not going to help you, so you can just flip the switch and turn it off. I also have an XSi and the lens I use for sports is an EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS which is not a fast lens, meaning when I'm zooming in on the action, my minimum aperture is 5.6, so although IS doesn't stop action (raise your shutter speed), it does basically eliminates camera shake which is the main cause of blurry pics. Now your looking at the 70-200 f2.8 which I have used on several occations (Non IS version) and it is a great lens. Shooting at 2.8 really helps low light shooting... big time. You can usually get a fast enough shutter speed in low light that you wouldn't need IS. IMO the only time you would "need" IS on the 70-200 f2.8 is if you were stoping up and shooting at f4.0, f5.6, or higher in low light. If your shootingmostly day games or use a tri/monopod, you definitly don't need it. I'm in the same position you are. I am planning on buying one of these lenses(70-200 f2.8 IS or non IS)in the near future and I'm undecided myself. I was dead set on getting the IS version until I shot with the non IS. If you've never shot at f2.8, you'll be amazed what it can do. Maybe rent the IS version and try it in low light situations with and without the IS on.


Hope this helps,


Steve