Gear purchase help, I really hate to ask.

[johnh2005]

IS can be a useful tool, but if you're spending that money, I'd look at the 70-200 f/2.8 non IS as a used sale. Wider aperture > IS almost anyday.

1 extra stop of aperture can't always make up for 3 stops of stabilization though. With the IS version you can shoot a sharp handheld portrait at 1/60s and 200mm comfortably, without IS @ 200mm you'd probably want to be on a tripod for anything under 1/200s. Plus, if you're stopped down a bit and shooting a bit slower you will get better lens sharpness and greater depth of field (not always desirable but sometimes quite necessary).

And IS can't stop motion. That's why I'd take a wider apeture over IS any day.

IS can't stop motion? What does that mean?

 

[Village Idiot]

1 extra stop of aperture can't always make up for 3 stops of stabilization though. With the IS version you can shoot a sharp handheld portrait at 1/60s and 200mm comfortably, without IS @ 200mm you'd probably want to be on a tripod for anything under 1/200s. Plus, if you're stopped down a bit and shooting a bit slower you will get better lens sharpness and greater depth of field (not always desirable but sometimes quite necessary).

And IS can't stop motion. That's why I'd take a wider apeture over IS any day.

IS can't stop motion? What does that mean?

Shutter speed stops motion. If you can take a shot of a still object at 1/60 that you would otherwise only be able to get at 1/200 without IS, the IS will assist you in getting a good photo. If that object is moving like a kid, a dog, or a plane falling out of the sky, and 1/200 will freeze the motion so you don't get blur, and 1/60 will not, IS will only help with the stabilization of the lens against lens shake and not stop the action of a moving target.

 

[fokker]

Different strokes I guess... don't get me wrong, I love my fast prime lenses and I recognise the benefit of a wide aperture, I guess it just depends what you're shooting most often.

 

[johnh2005]

And IS can't stop motion. That's why I'd take a wider apeture over IS any day.

IS can't stop motion? What does that mean?

Shutter speed stops motion. If you can take a shot of a still object at 1/60 that you would otherwise only be able to get at 1/200 without IS, the IS will assist you in getting a good photo. If that object is moving like a kid, a dog, or a plane falling out of the sky, and 1/200 will freeze the motion so you don't get blur, and 1/60 will not, IS will only help with the stabilization of the lens against lens shake and not stop the action of a moving target.

Ah, so you did not mean, IS can't stop motion. You meant that IS slows down the shutter speed making it harder to get the speeds needed for stopping the motion. I had asked this because I was taking some really nice pool shots with my 18-55 kit lens with the IS on and the motion was stopped VERY well. However, it was mid afternoon and very bright and clear day. Taking what you said into account, had it been a cloudy/overcast day, with the IS on I would have had to slow the shutter speed to get a proper exposure, therefore not being able to stop the action as well as if I had had a wider AP and no IS. Got it! Thanks! I appreciate the response!

 

[Village Idiot]

IS can't stop motion? What does that mean?

Shutter speed stops motion. If you can take a shot of a still object at 1/60 that you would otherwise only be able to get at 1/200 without IS, the IS will assist you in getting a good photo. If that object is moving like a kid, a dog, or a plane falling out of the sky, and 1/200 will freeze the motion so you don't get blur, and 1/60 will not, IS will only help with the stabilization of the lens against lens shake and not stop the action of a moving target.

Ah, so you did not mean, IS can't stop motion. You meant that IS slows down the shutter speed making it harder to get the speeds needed for stopping the motion. I had asked this because I was taking some really nice pool shots with my 18-55 kit lens with the IS on and the motion was stopped VERY well. However, it was mid afternoon and very bright and clear day. Taking what you said into account, had it been a cloudy/overcast day, with the IS on I would have had to slow the shutter speed to get a proper exposure, therefore not being able to stop the action as well as if I had had a wider AP and no IS. Got it! Thanks! I appreciate the response!

No, I meant IS cannot stop motion. It will stop blur from camera shake, but it will not stop the motion of a moving object.

 

[KmH]

Ah, so you did not mean, IS can't stop motion.

Indeed he did mean IS can't stop motion. IS (VR) only diminishes camera shake.

Nikon's VR and Canon's IS are essentially the same thing (IIRC Canon licensed Nikon's VR). So, what Thom has to say about VR applies to IS as well: Nikon VR explained

 

[Village Idiot]

Ah, so you did not mean, IS can't stop motion.

Indeed he did mean IS can't stop motion. IS (VR) only diminishes camera shake.

Nikon's VR and Canon's IS are essentially the same thing (IIRC Canon licensed Nikon's VR). So, what Thom has to say about VR applies to IS as well: Nikon VR explained

Canon was the first to produce an IS lens in 1995 and I believe Nikon's first VR lens was released in 2000.

 

[KmH]

Ok, I had some doubt which is why I used IIRC, maybe I don't remember correctly. Another research project to add to the list.

Of course Canon and Nikon elected to put their image stabilization system in the lens so the stabilized image can be seen in the viewfinder. This leads to a better user experience and allows the photographer to chose a moment to release the shutter when image movement appears to be at a minimum. Having the image stabilization system in the lens allows a very small displacement of an optical element to result in a large image shift, so large amplitude shifts can more easily be corrected by in-the-lens image stabilization systems.

Minolta (now Sony), Panasonic, Pentax and Olympus have their image stabilization system as part of the image sensor in the camera body, so the stabilized image can not be seen in the camera viewfinder, and large image shifts cannot be corrected for.

 

[Village Idiot]

Ok, I had some doubt which is why I used IIRC, maybe I don't remember correctly. Another research project to add to the list.

Of course Canon and Nikon elected to put their image stabilization system in the lens so the stabilized image can be seen in the viewfinder. This leads to a better user experience and allows the photographer to chose a moment to release the shutter when image movement appears to be at a minimum. Having the image stabilization system in the lens allows a very small displacement of an optical element to result in a large image shift, so large amplitude shifts can more easily be corrected by in-the-lens image stabilization systems.

Minolta (now Sony), Panasonic, Pentax and Olympus have their image stabilization system as part of the image sensor in the camera body, so the stabilized image can not be seen in the camera viewfinder, and large image shifts cannot be corrected for.

Actually....The IS tech was brought to the market when film was still the dominant media. I read that there was a company that managed to use an in body IS for a film camera, but have to stabilize a frame of film that's not a part of the camera and moves on after being used was not exactly the easiest practice.

Even when Nikon released it's first VR lens in 2000, the price of DSLRs were still through the roof. What was it, '02ish that the "affordable" Canon Rebel was released and cost $1,000 for a 6mp plastic body DSLR?

 

[Aze]

One last question on the lens, will I end up finding the 70-200 too long for full-body portraiture? I am currently on a canon crop.

 

[KmH]

Not if you have enough room to back away from the subject.

I use a Nikon 200 mm f/2 prime on both an APS-C and a FF image sensor for most of my portraits, though I use the APS-C sensor only when I'm outside with the 200 f/2.

 

[vtf]

Just an fyi. I just watched a Used Canon 70x200mm f4 (non IS) go for $465, good condition. Wished I had the money to have bidded on it.

 

[Village Idiot]

Just an fyi. I just watched a Used Canon 70x200mm f4 (non IS) go for $465, good condition. Wished I had the money to have bidded on it.

I think I might start slinging lenses. I'm going to corner the martket by buying all the 70-200's that come up for sale and flipping them for $100 each. Yes, I'll organize it and do something criminal so I can call it organized crime. It will be the rise of the West Virginia Quadrad.

 

[vtf]

Just an fyi. I just watched a Used Canon 70x200mm f4 (non IS) go for $465, good condition. Wished I had the money to have bidded on it.

I think I might start slinging lenses. I'm going to corner the martket by buying all the 70-200's that come up for sale and flipping them for $100 each. Yes, I'll organize it and do something criminal so I can call it organized crime. It will be the rise of the West Virginia Quadrad.

you might have something.

 

[jake337]

I'm unfamilar with all the canon mounts, but his t1i cannot mount an FD lens correct? If I'm wrong, and it can mount, I see used 135 f2 FD for $499 at KEH. Not sure how well the FD to EOS adapters work though.

Canon Manual Focus 135 F2 FD (72) 35MM SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

Or an extra $389 for a newer AF version
Canon EOS 135 F2 L ULTRASONIC (72) WITH CAPS 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com