To IS or not to IS (a canon 70/200 4L thread)

[Hans_Andersson]

I recently bought a tamron 70/200 2.8 wich is supersharp but the AF has some issues with being slow and inaccurate wich leaves alot to be desired for rc and motocross.

So my plan now is to exchange it to a canon 70/200 4L but i have some questions.

Since the tamron and most of my other lenses have 3.5 or less (2.8 is popular with me) i wonder what you guys think about the canon being only 4. Will this be a problem? How is the bokeh on this one?
And since it is "only" 4L im guessing that the model with IS is the one to go with, but the price is really high for me.

Anyone here own anyone of the canons? or maybe have tried both?

And yes i have tried to search but im an idiot with bad engrish so any kind of help would be nice.

[glypo]

I have and shot with a Canon 70-200mm f/4.0 L series without IS and it is spot on.

For action photos and the like you don't really need IS, especially only at 200mm. If you were talking about the 100-400mm f/4.0-5.6 L then the IS there is great. At 400mm you can shoot at 1/200s handheld and still get sharp photos - so IS helps there. But not needed for 200mm in my opinion.

By the way Canon do a 70-200mm f/2.8 L without IS for about £900. But I assume if the f/4.0 L IS is out of budget at £750... the f/2.8 will be well out of budget.

I have tried both the f/4.0 and f/2.8 70-200mm L lenses, but not a f/4.0 IS. I can honestly say the f/4.0 in my opinion is better (much lighter weight) for action photos as you don't need anything below f/4.0 (depth of view becomes too shallow and on a sunny day with f/4.0 you can get over 1/6400 so speed certainly not an issue either).

Obviously for portraits and what not people will find the f/2.8 of more value, but even so.... worth the money, not really. As for the IS as you asked, as I said with the f/4.0 you can get some mad quick shutter speeds anyway so IS becomes much less relevant.

[craigosh]

I Use the IS on my 24-105mm quite a bit, its quite useful for cheating an extra stop out of the shutter speed when i'm working indoors. Not much use on a bright sunny day, as mentioned, but if the clouds roll in it can help keep things still.

Have you looked at the sigma 70-200? that gets good reviews and has an AF motor similar to Canons HSM, so that would probably sort your AF problems.

The other approach would simply be to learn to pre-focus well. Regardless of whether I'm using my USM lenses or not, if i'm shooting action I usually manual and pre-focus.

[glypo]

Yeah, very good point.

Hans I notice you use a 400D. I can't remember exactly how the focusing works there. but I'm sure it's similar to my 40D.

Of course, you can pre-focus using AF, say on the apex of a corner and keep the shutter release button pressed halfway which works well. But as Craig said you can manually focus. What I like to do here is switch the lens to MF obviously. But if you press the shutter button half way (like you to to AF) the AF points will beep when they come in focus. This makes it dead easy to manaul focus, and unlike AF your focus point is not lost once you take your finger off the shutter button.

Really helps speed things up when using a slower lens.

[craigosh]

Have you looked at used lenses Hans?

I've just come across a place here in the uk with a 70-200mm f2.8 non IS and an f4 IS for pretty much the same price. In fact the f2.8 lens is the cheaper of the two.

Always worth considering Used kit, can get some good deals.

[sim]

Originally Posted by glypo

What I like to do here is switch the lens to MF obviously. But if you press the shutter button half way (like you to to AF) the AF points will beep when they come in focus. This makes it dead easy to manaul focus, and unlike AF your focus point is not lost once you take your finger off the shutter button.

Sweet! Thanks for the tip. Glad I poked my nose in here.

[jimmy]

I never use the IS (called VR on mine, but same thing) - I used to just because it was there. For really (really) low shutter speed panning shots it worked a little but tbh you can get the same stabilization by using a smoother arc when panning.
For anything moving that you're not trying to get a special (slow pan) effect with, then IS really isn't worth spending extra on.

Generally with my 70-200 F2.8 I will shoot from F4 to around F11 outdoors - I find F2.8 depth of field to be just too small for most things.

[Hans_Andersson]

Ive been thinking about what good the IS funktion is.

So if im in a darker place (say indoors) and i think it might be to dark for 4. so i compensate by turning the shutter speed down to 1/8s the movement the camera is trying to capture isnt affected. So i still get blurry pics with that lens. In other words...use less...

But if im trying to take "faster" pictures indoors the pictures will just get darker, since the IS funktion doesnt have anything to do with the image getting more light at higher speeds.


God this make thing so hard to decide. I cant really afford to exchange my tamron 70/200 to a canon 70/200 2.8L. But i can afford a canon 70/200 4L without IS. Alot cheaper without.


So basicly im between a hardplace and a rock.


I have also been thinking of exchangin the lens for a eos40d, but that will still leave me with lenses that i dont really like.

I still need a new good 17/55-70 lens and a better 70-200 lens.
The ones i have now are the 18-55 kit lens and a tamron 55-200 that does its job but isnt sharp enough and the AF is to hesitant.

I still use my tamron 90 macro for...well...macro and my canon 50 1.8 for portraiture.

But i still need something for motocross and other stuff, traveling and etc.
The canon 70/200 IS was a good candidate...but now im kind of hesitant.

I wish i had all the money in the world.
Argh....

[glypo]

You don't need IS for any action photography. For shooting indoors, just turn your ISO up. Sure it makes a little noise.... but it's cheaper than IS. I am convinced when you pan around with IS it doesn't even work that well anyway.

IS is best for portrait shots etc, i.e. static stuff. So.... if I were you I'd just get the 70-200mm f/4.0. That way you won't break the bank... and still get a fantastic lens.

[mole2k]

I've never found the need for IS personally, a lot of people swear by it but I still maintain if you hold the camera properly and steady yourself you'll take sharper photos than somebody shaking about the place letting IS correct it for them.

Unless your talking very long focal lengths I dont see the need.

[Hans_Andersson]

I just emailed the shop to send me a 70/200 without IS. The money im saving from choosing that lens will go to my eos40d dream.

[mrlexan]

I know I am chiming in late on this one, but I agree for a 200, I wouldn't bother with IS. It is containable at that level, and all it will do is drain your battery quicker.

Now, I am have used a 600/f4 alot in the past on the race course and I think it is a great thing to have, heck the thing weighs 12 lbs and is 18 inches long without the hood.... even the slightest breeze made the thing a sail. The wind kicking up a Sebring would blow me around no matter how hard I would try to keep it steady. With that type of equipment in those conditions, it is/was a great thing to have.

[Cooper]

yipeeeee !!
got mine, no IS

IS is more for yourself shaking rather than the object shaking. For low light applications mostly.