How good is Canon IS Lens Technology

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Mark Williams, Aug 14, 2006.

  1. In need of a lens that could be used in low light situations... like
    concerts, graduations and indoor portraits.

    I tried experimenting to determine the focal lengths I would need in order
    to determine if there is one lens that would cover the range I would like to
    use it for. For the family holiday shot... done indoors in an average size
    room... I figure I would need to be able to go down to at least 35mm for
    small group shots... even less for indoor family type shot. I then tried
    to set up distance close to a concert or graduation... 135mm would be
    good... but 200mm would be better. They do make a Canon EF 28-135mm
    f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens, but that would be putting a lot of faith in the IS
    technology. How good is Canon IS Technology?

    http://www.42photo.com/productdetail.asp?level=119&catid=339&productid=7616

    I found some good info on the IS (gain 3 stops)... check out IS info on
    right hand side

    http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=148

    Still on the hunt to see if they make a fast lens in this range that is not
    a ridiculous price. I guess a perfect lens would be a fast lens (f/2.8)...
    with a range of 28mm-200mm. Any recommendations on the best thing to get
    for the money? Thoughts on IS?
     
    Mark Williams, Aug 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Mark Williams

    Joe Guest

    IS is very good. However, you need prime lenses for moving subjects. For
    zoom lenses, the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 are excellent, although limited.
    For real low light you need to go for primes.
     
    Joe, Aug 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mark Williams

    Joe Guest

    IS is very good. However, you need prime lenses for moving subjects. For
    zoom lenses, the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 are excellent, although limited.
    For real low light you need to go for primes.
     
    Joe, Aug 14, 2006
    #3
  4. Mark Williams

    gypsy3001 Guest

    IS is wonderful. But it is really only good for still lifes, such as
    the indoor portraits you mentioned.

    For concerts and graduation, people are moving. IS at f/5.6 isn't going
    to be sufficient to stop motion. I shot my brother's graduation with
    the 28-135mm IS once (see URL below). Few indoor shots are useable,
    though it worked well outdoors.

    http://www.camerahacker.com/Graduation_Pictures/picture_tips.html

    Now, I carry three fix focus lens for indoor shots: 28mm f/2.8, 50mm
    f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.8. I will still carry the 28-135mm IS if I want a
    single lens, but I only shoot photos of people while they are still (in
    between expressions), or if I wanted the blurring effect of motion
    (such as a waltz).

    Chieh
     
    gypsy3001, Aug 14, 2006
    #4
  5. Mark Williams

    JohnR66 Guest

    While on this subject, I wonder about the advantages of in body IS vs. in
    lens. Obviously, in body reduces the replication of the technology in each
    lens (less $$). However, I wonder how effictive in body IS is when used with
    long telephoto where sensor movement would need to be fast and large to
    oppose the camera shake.
    John
     
    JohnR66, Aug 14, 2006
    #5
  6. Mark Williams

    JohnR66 Guest

    While on this subject, I wonder about the advantages of in body IS vs. in
    lens. Obviously, in body reduces the replication of the technology in each
    lens (less $$). However, I wonder how effictive in body IS is when used with
    long telephoto where sensor movement would need to be fast and large to
    oppose the camera shake.
    John
     
    JohnR66, Aug 14, 2006
    #6
  7. Mark Williams

    Mark² Guest

    Not true at all.
    All L telephoto IS lenses have panning mode (mode 2) which works extremely
    well with fast-moving subjects.

    Only the wider angle to normal line and non-L IS lenses are without mode 2.
     
    Mark², Aug 15, 2006
    #7
  8. Mark Williams

    Mark² Guest

    Not true at all.
    All L telephoto IS lenses have panning mode (mode 2) which works extremely
    well with fast-moving subjects.

    Only the wider angle to normal line and non-L IS lenses are without mode 2.
     
    Mark², Aug 15, 2006
    #8
  9. Mark Williams

    Matt Ion Guest

    Another thing to consider is a faster prime lens (f/2 or f/2.8). IS will
    typically buy you about two to three stops more exposure... f/2.8 being two
    stops faster than f/5.6, you'll be able to get about the same shutter with
    either, but a pair of non-IS primes (one 35mm, one 200mm) would probably not
    cost you much, if any, more than your IS zoom.

    What body are you using? The newer ones have excellent noise characteristics on
    high-ISO, which would allow you to shoot at ISO 1600 without much problem.
     
    Matt Ion, Aug 15, 2006
    #9
  10. Mark Williams

    Matt Ion Guest

    Another thing to consider is a faster prime lens (f/2 or f/2.8). IS will
    typically buy you about two to three stops more exposure... f/2.8 being two
    stops faster than f/5.6, you'll be able to get about the same shutter with
    either, but a pair of non-IS primes (one 35mm, one 200mm) would probably not
    cost you much, if any, more than your IS zoom.

    What body are you using? The newer ones have excellent noise characteristics on
    high-ISO, which would allow you to shoot at ISO 1600 without much problem.
     
    Matt Ion, Aug 15, 2006
    #10
  11. Mark Williams

    SkipM Guest

    I've used an IS lens of some sort or another for several years now, starting
    with the 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM. I really liked that lens, but shooting
    indoors (at weddings) pointed out its shortcomings, or rather, shortcoming,
    it isn't an f2.8. The drawback there is any f2.8 IS lens is going to be
    stonkingly expensive. In fact, the only zoom f2.8 IS lens is the 70-200
    f2.8L IS USM, (which I have and love) coming in at about $1200, your other
    choices being fixed focal length lenses of 300mm f2.8 ($3900) 400 f2.8
    ($6600). Ouch.
    Makes you want to go for a 70-200 f4 and a monopod, doesn't it?
    As far as the zoom range your looking for, that prospect is a little better,
    with a high of the 28-300 f3.5-5.6 L IS USM, ringing up at $2200, or the low
    of the 28-200 f3.5-5.6 USM at $360, but no IS. Or the 28-135 IS that
    started the conversation at $420...
    As far as IS goes, I wouldn't buy a lens without it, if I had the option of
    one with it. No matter what, it will save a shot one day, and it never (or
    at least under normal circumstances) will negatively affect a shot. It is
    worth the extra money.
     
    SkipM, Aug 15, 2006
    #11
  12. Mark Williams

    SkipM Guest

    I've used an IS lens of some sort or another for several years now, starting
    with the 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM. I really liked that lens, but shooting
    indoors (at weddings) pointed out its shortcomings, or rather, shortcoming,
    it isn't an f2.8. The drawback there is any f2.8 IS lens is going to be
    stonkingly expensive. In fact, the only zoom f2.8 IS lens is the 70-200
    f2.8L IS USM, (which I have and love) coming in at about $1200, your other
    choices being fixed focal length lenses of 300mm f2.8 ($3900) 400 f2.8
    ($6600). Ouch.
    Makes you want to go for a 70-200 f4 and a monopod, doesn't it?
    As far as the zoom range your looking for, that prospect is a little better,
    with a high of the 28-300 f3.5-5.6 L IS USM, ringing up at $2200, or the low
    of the 28-200 f3.5-5.6 USM at $360, but no IS. Or the 28-135 IS that
    started the conversation at $420...
    As far as IS goes, I wouldn't buy a lens without it, if I had the option of
    one with it. No matter what, it will save a shot one day, and it never (or
    at least under normal circumstances) will negatively affect a shot. It is
    worth the extra money.
     
    SkipM, Aug 15, 2006
    #12
  13. Mark Williams

    SkipM Guest

    You're right, brain fart. Too many lenses with commas in the prices...<G>
     
    SkipM, Aug 15, 2006
    #13
  14. Mark Williams

    SkipM Guest

    You're right, brain fart. Too many lenses with commas in the prices...<G>
     
    SkipM, Aug 15, 2006
    #14
  15. Mark Williams

    Mark² Guest

    Where are you finding the 70-200 2.8 IS for $1200??
    I already own the lens...but where I look it's more like $1600-1700.
    :)
     
    Mark², Aug 15, 2006
    #15
  16. Mark Williams

    Mark² Guest

    Where are you finding the 70-200 2.8 IS for $1200??
    I already own the lens...but where I look it's more like $1600-1700.
    :)
     
    Mark², Aug 15, 2006
    #16
  17. Mark Williams

    Mark² Guest

    The 100-400 IS is closer to that...
    ....My brain toots a lot, so no worries.
    :)
     
    Mark², Aug 15, 2006
    #17
  18. Mark Williams

    Mark² Guest

    The 100-400 IS is closer to that...
    ....My brain toots a lot, so no worries.
    :)
     
    Mark², Aug 15, 2006
    #18
  19. Mark Williams

    ASAAR Guest

    You're picking nits. Panning mode wouldn't help the OP very much.
    It may be useful for tracking race cars, sprinters, isolated
    wildlife, etc. But the problem with people at graduations or people
    and performers at concerts is that they don't synchronize their
    movements, but move in randomly different directions.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 15, 2006
    #19
  20. Mark Williams

    ASAAR Guest

    You're picking nits. Panning mode wouldn't help the OP very much.
    It may be useful for tracking race cars, sprinters, isolated
    wildlife, etc. But the problem with people at graduations or people
    and performers at concerts is that they don't synchronize their
    movements, but move in randomly different directions.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 15, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.