To Spend Money or To Save More? To IS or Not To IS?

[Ryan L]

Thankfully I made all smart purchases and was able to sell all the lenses for at least what I bought them for. But I would have been much happier to have had bought the IS to begin with. I asked the same question on here and didnt listen. So I finally ponied up and bought the one I should have bought to start with.

I thought could get the F4 and be happy. Well I shoot alot of sports and outside it was alright. Forget indoor with it. Then I had a wedding and figured I needed a 2.8. It worked, but I would have had a handful of shots that I could have used had I had the 2.8 IS. Especially the indoor shots.

Dont cheap out like did just to regret it 2 weeks from now and have to sell it and buy another. Just my thoughts.

 

[Ryan L]

both the F4 and the 2.8 IS are ok on a tripod with IS on. Neither are 1st generation IS. As a matter of fact you should leave it on as it has "tripod sensing IS" and will comp for any sudden vibrations while on the tripod.

 

[Taylor510ce]

It just drains batts when on a tripod, the downside. So its best to turn it off regardless.

Like the old saying goes, buy cheap buy twice.
I used a tamron 70-300 non IS cheap lens fairly successfully for a year before going to a canon 70-300 IS and it was something I should have done sooner. I was always shooting full length sometimes with a TC and it got shakey. IS would always work even with the TC. It made things a lot easier and I could snap a shot without chimping everytime with a good amount of confidence that I would not see motion blur when I got home and uploaded. But then again, the tamron still WORKED, just not as well. Composing at long length is also easier with IS cause the view finder image also stabilizes.

 

[icassell]

I don't have IS on any lens. I have a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 and a Canon 400mm f/5.6L which I usually shoot handheld. IS would be very nice, but it is certainly not a necessity.

 

[Gaerek]

cool man you win :thumbup:

I don't know what your problem is. If you don't want to have a discussion, don't post on an online discussion forum. I'm not trying to win, I'm trying to give a different point of view. You seem to believe that IS is something that is extremely helpful and useful in many circumstances. I don't believe it is. Who is right? Let me answer that:

1) It doesn't matter who's right. We're both trying to help the OP, correct?

2) Neither of us is right. Neither of us is wrong also. We both have valid opinions that reflect our own usage of the technology in question. Both opinions help the OP to make the best decision possible.

And if you re-read my post, you'll see that I actually think the IS version of the lens is worth the money. BUT, not for the IS.

If you don't like me for some reason, that's cool. I'm a big boy and I can handle it. I couldn't care less about what some random person online thinks about me. But, I have nothing at all against you, and am just trying to help the OP make a good decision...supposedly the same thing you're trying to do. As far as I know, I haven't done anything to you to make you dislike me, other than a sarcastic comment a few weeks ago that was meant as some friendly ribbing that I think you overreacted to.

If I've said something or done something that you didn't like, disrespected you, or anything like that, I apologize. It wasn't my intent. Please understand that responding to a comment you make isn't personal, it's simply a different point of view.

 

[Gaerek]

It made things a lot easier and I could snap a shot without chimping everytime with a good amount of confidence that I would not see motion blur when I got home and uploaded.

Just want to make sure you meant to say "camera shake" and not "motion blur." These are different things, and IS won't help with motion blur at all.

 

[prodigy2k7]

It made things a lot easier and I could snap a shot without chimping everytime with a good amount of confidence that I would not see motion blur when I got home and uploaded.

Just want to make sure you meant to say "camera shake" and not "motion blur." These are different things, and IS won't help with motion blur at all.

thats partially what im trying to convey here in my posts. To use IS, and low shutter speeds, you need to be shooting subjects that aren't moving or you will get blurry pictures.

The f/4 versions are WAY light, and dont need a monopod for instance tho, easily hand holdable compared to the 2.8

I do agree that IS is getting overrated. Its like one of those megapixel things. Everyone wants IS, because its awesome and it helps hand-hold camera blah blah blah. The truth is probably half of people end up draining their battery and dont know when to properly use it.

Ex: the guy before said motion blur instead of camera shake.

 

[MohaimenK]

[other than a sarcastic comment a few weeks ago that was meant as some friendly ribbing that I think you overreacted to.

If I've said something or done something that you didn't like, disrespected you, or anything like that, I apologize. It wasn't my intent. Please understand that responding to a comment you make isn't personal, it's simply a different point of view.

Yeah I think that's what it was or something to do with my equipments... It's cool my bad :hug::

 

[Destin]

I personally would go with a non-is 70-200 2.8 (maybe used), over a f4 is. I'm a nikon guy though, so I'm not up on canon's prices

 

[Gaerek]

Yeah I think that's what it was or something to do with my equipments... It's cool my bad :hug::

No worries, I'd prefer to clear up any misunderstandings rather than let them sit and fester. And yeah, my comment was probably a bit inappropriate, but it wasn't my intent to offend, just to have a little fun. I'm sorry about that. :cheers:

 

[Ryan L]

I'm getting that warm and fuzzy feeling in here! Who needs a hug??

 

[Taylor510ce]

It made things a lot easier and I could snap a shot without chimping everytime with a good amount of confidence that I would not see motion blur when I got home and uploaded.

Just want to make sure you meant to say "camera shake" and not "motion blur." These are different things, and IS won't help with motion blur at all.

thats partially what im trying to convey here in my posts. To use IS, and low shutter speeds, you need to be shooting subjects that aren't moving or you will get blurry pictures.

The f/4 versions are WAY light, and dont need a monopod for instance tho, easily hand holdable compared to the 2.8

I do agree that IS is getting overrated. Its like one of those megapixel things. Everyone wants IS, because its awesome and it helps hand-hold camera blah blah blah. The truth is probably half of people end up draining their battery and dont know when to properly use it.

Ex: the guy before said motion blur instead of camera shake.

It was a typo, I clearly know the difference is. I also know how to use IS you dipstick. Wrong phrasing, and practical applications are two different things. The reason why I dont make much of a distinction is because while your subject may not be in motion, your hands are. Shake is a form of motion. I agree for instructional purposes, I should have said camera shake being that the term typically refers to subject motion.

 

[Neil S.]

If someone says that THEY dont need IS, theres no sense in arguing with them because its their opinion.

On the flip side theres no sense arguing that someone else does need it for the same reason as above.

Please do not say that IS is or isnt necessary for other photographers, because it is a highly subjective thing.

There are many factors that determine if it would be useful to someone or not, depending on their style and types of shots they take. Some people shoot handheld 99% of the time, and some people use a tripod 99% of the time.

The best thing is to present the facts of what it is and is not, as well as its advantages and disadvantages.

After that it is up to each individual photographer to decide if they need it or not.

/ENDTHREAD

 

[Neil S.]

It was a typo, I clearly know the difference is. I also know how to use IS you dipstick.

LOL

 

[Taylor510ce]

Please note, I do not take offense to your disagreement, but I do take offense to smart @ss insinuations.

Edit: whoops, that goes with my previous post.


I agree neil