Lenses and IS question...

JJP · Jul 24, 2006

OK, well basically i'm going to be buying a new lens soon. I will be using this mainly for live music photography. (i'll need the zoom, hehe)

I've been looking at the Canon EF70-200 f2.8L IS USM. Now that is around £1000-£1100.

There is also the Canon EF70-200 f2.8L USM (without IS) Which comes at around £700-£750.

Would you really say IS is a must have? Would you recommend that I keep saving up the extra money to get the IS version of this lens? Thanks for any help. :thumbup:

Big Mike · Jul 24, 2006

There was a similar question asked recently, I can't find the thread though.

IS will help you get sharper shots of static objects at slower shutter speeds. It will not, however, help freeze motion blur. So even if you can get sharp shots (hand-held) at 1/15...that will not freeze the movement of the subject. Although, when shooting hand held in low light...you need all the help you can get.

JJP · Jul 24, 2006

Eeugh, thats what I thought. >.<
In that case i'll keep saving and get the IS version hehe.
Thanks. ;-)

Mindii · Jul 24, 2006

Yep for the light light conditions you will be working under you would be much better off with the IS version....its well worth the extra $$$'s..

DepthAfield · Jul 25, 2006

I agree! Stabilization lenses (and now some camera bodies) are an amazing technology and work very well.

bigfatbadger · Jul 25, 2006

And for live music shots, some motion blur is often no bad thing. VR will keep the background steady with blur on the performers

Edit: IS, sorry, Nikon habits