Is IS that important to you in a lens?

[Village Idiot]

70-200 f/2.8L > 70-200 f/4L IS

 

[Dao]

70-200 f/2.8L > 70-200 f/4L IS

+1

 

[hankejp]

I haven't used any IS or VR, in the Nikon World. I don't think I need it as my photo's seem to be turning out fine with my Sigma 70-300. It might be nice to have though as a backup to a steady hand.

 

[CyclonePWR]

It allows me to shoot sometimes as slow as 1/10 SS or even slower with out a blur, on my 18-55mm. I love it.

 

[epp_b]

For telephoto shots of anything that doesn't move or moves slowly, IS/VR is a must. I can hand-hold 1/10th @ ~100mm if I squat down and hold my breath.

I wish I had VR on my 18-55 so I can hand-hold for even longer at the wide end.

 

[EhJsNe]

It allows me to shoot sometimes as slow as 1/10 SS or even slower with out a blur, on my 18-55mm. I love it.

Shooting longer speed at lower focal lengths isnt that amazing....Ive used a 2 second exposure handheld and turned out pretty darn good. (At 50mm)

To the OP, IS/VR/OS to me is a waste of money. With cameras that have AMAZING high ISO performance, just bumbp up the ISO, and there ya go.

And since your planing to se it with a tripod anyway, why would you spend an extra 500 dollars on a feature that would hardlr get used. And even hand holding, unless its dark, you wont have to worry about image shake.

 

[epp_b]

Shooting longer speed at lower focal lengths isnt that amazing....Ive used a 2 second exposure handheld and turned out pretty darn good. (At 50mm)

Mr. Rockwell, is that you?

Sorry, I could maybe believe 1/2 second, but 2 seconds? Bull-hockey-pucks.

 

[inTempus]

On zoom lenses like the 70-200, I would prefer to have IS. It makes a huge difference.

On my shorter lenses like the 17-40 and my 24-70, I don't really need it or miss it.

 

[Montana]

It is a "godsend" for longer lenses. I like it on my 70-200 2.8 and on my 600mm f/4. Shorter focal lengths...not so important to me at all.

 

[Battou]

I do not own a single IS lens, if that answeres your question.

 

[CyclonePWR]

Well with my camera if I bump the ISO up more than 400 I get a lot of noise, especially if its darker indoors. So I like IS even below 70mm. I know you can fix it PP but its better if its not even there.

 

[itznfb]

i'll say that with longer focal lengths it's a nice feature to have. but for me personally i do most of my shooting in ample natural light, or on a tripod for night landscapes and don't get much use out of VR/IS. so if i can get the same specs on a lens minus the VR/IS for much cheaper, then i'll go without.

 

[Mindy]

Wow lots of good feedback here. Thanks. I definitely want IS. And I've ruled out the lens I was looking at which didn't have IS.

My mind is really buzzing now of all the decisions I need to make. Do I get the kit lens (18-55 IS) or the 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM? What about the 50mm 1.4 USM? How does that fit in, if it does? It's what I want in IQ. Then there's the 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM which is exactly what I want in IQ and performance. But if I get the 28-135 then how much does it buy me to have a 70-200?

Okay much to think about.

 

[Overread]

agreed - although usable high ISO are now becomming more standard in midrange cameras the entry level ones still have poor ISO control above ISO 400 - further I would far rather not have to use higher ISOs even if there was good control of the noise - a lower ISO is nearly always best and if IS/OS/VR lets me do that then its worth the cost.

I think its also important to point out that IS is much like having wide apertures such as f2.8 and f1.8 -- just because you have it does not mean you will use it all the time - but its means that you have it to use when you need it.

 

[bdavison]

My standpoint is this.

IS or VR is not necessary. People took pictures, and continue to take tack sharp pictures with lenses without this feature.

This being said, is it a good thing to have? Without a doubt. Its a really nice feature to have, and can open up some new possibilities.

Dont be swayed away from lenses simply because they dont have IS/VR.