IS on Canon Lens

[misstwinklytoes]

My kit lens has IS on it and the 55-250 lens I was looking at has it. If I get a 50mm F/1.8 will it have it?

Do I -need- it?

I'm doing mostly pictures of people, but some landscapes etc. I'm just trying to get the best deal for my $ cause I don't have $ to spare.

EDIT::::

So, here's what I'm debating now (and I'm going to add this to the original post) With my budget (in october!) I'm thinking about getting the

1} 50mm 1.4
OR
2} 50mm 1.8 AND 50-250mm zoom lens

Suggestions?

 

[TiCoyote]

The 50mm 1.8 does not have IS.

Do you need it? Well, that's hard to say. It can add up to 3 stops to handhold a lens. Normally you want to shoot at a shutter speed that is as fast as, or faster than the number that is your focal length. Thus, with a 50mm, you want to shoot at 1/50th of a second, or faster. I'm not sure if many cameras let you do this, so really you'd be shooting at 1/60th. Some say that if you have a crop sensor, you'll need to multiply the focal length by the crop factor to get a minimum shooting speed. So now, you're looking at 1/80 or faster.

If you're using a longer telephoto, lens, the IS can really come in handy. It's hard to hold those puppies still, and you need a pretty fast exposure to overcome this.

IS will only compensate for camera shake. It will not freeze movement in front of the lens. It is most helpful in low light conditions. It can allow you to shoot at a lower ISO, getting a sharper image. You never need IS if you are using a tripod.

If you're shooting outdoors, in the daytime, with lots of light, you probably don't need it. If you're shooting inside or at night, and you cannot use a tripod, you'll probably find it helpful.

 

[Steve01]

Canons 50mm f1.8 doesn't have image stabilization.
IS is really more important on the longer lenses.

 

[MohaimenK]

Yeah it becomes a problem when you have telephoto zoom really

 

[misstwinklytoes]

Gotcha! Thanks for the info! I was just really worried about it because I have no surgeons hands by any means!

 

[fokker]

It's also useful on wider angle lenses than just tele zooms, for instance beign able to to take sharp handheld shots at 0.5s shutter speed @ 17mm to blur a waterfall - it's a lot easier than bringing your tripod everywhere.

As far as I'm aware, no prime lenses have IS until you get up to the likes of the EF 300mm f4L IS or longer.

 

[DennyCrane]

Just a note, never use IS when using a tripod. It will hunt for shake and introduce blur.

 

[fokker]

^ Unless your IS lens is tripod sensing, which the majority of them now are.

 

[misstwinklytoes]

All very valuable and interesting information. Thanks!

 

[misstwinklytoes]

So, here's what I'm debating now (and I'm going to add this to the original post) With my budget (in October!) I'm thinking about getting the

1} 50mm 1.4
OR
2} 50mm 1.8 AND 50-250mm zoom lens

Suggestions?

 

[RL.]

So, here's what I'm debating now (and I'm going to add this to the original post) With my budget (in October!) I'm thinking about getting the

1} 50mm 1.4
OR
2} 50mm 1.8 AND 50-250mm zoom lens

Suggestions?

i would go with number 2

 

[Dao]

So, here's what I'm debating now (and I'm going to add this to the original post) With my budget (in October!) I'm thinking about getting the

1} 50mm 1.4
OR
2} 50mm 1.8 AND 50-250mm zoom lens

Suggestions?

If you are not going to get any lens for a long while after this, of course go with number 2.


Also, if you really do not know why you need to get the 50mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.8 or the 55-250mm IS lens, maybe wait a little longer.


I think the logic should not be ...
"I save up X amount of money and I need to buy a lens since I now has $X."

It should be ...

"I find a limitation on my current photography equipments and that stop me from produce the result I want, let's save up some money so that I can buy that equipment and do what I want to do." (Of course, new equipment may require new skills.)

 

[peterhanowell]

I use the 50 1.4, but based on what you have written here, I might suggest your second option, and further suggest that you use it for several months to get a good feel for how you like the lenses, see if you are pushing their limitations, and so on. I know you can get great images with the 50 1.8 - I'm less confident in the other, but you may be happy with it.

Good luck!

Peter
--
Tallahassee Wedding Photography

 

[MohaimenK]

Gotcha! Thanks for the info! I was just really worried about it because I have no surgeons hands by any means!

Even Steve Urkel could take perfect pictures with the 18-55 mm IS lens:x

 

[Idahophoto]

I don't see really much use of IS on any lens short of 100 or so. No that lens does not have it but you don't need it. Tamron recently came out with a IS version of it's popular 17-50 2.8 lens. Since I was going to buy this lens anyways (Atleast the older non IS) I gave it some thought. But could not think of a single time I used it on my Nikon mount version. So when I bought it again in the Canon mount I stuck with the non IS version and have never regretted it. I saved like 200 bucks over the new version with it. It's a personal choice and some might want it for a lens of this focal legth but I really don't see the need for it.