Image Stabilization Lenses

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Sandy Bloom, Ph.D., Jan 19, 2006.

  1. What do you folks generally think of the Image Stabilization (IS) lenses
    versus the regular digital lenses? Most of what I heard and read suggests
    they are markedly better. I've heard some rave reviews about the Canon IS
    lenses, notwithstanding the poor quality kit lens that comes with the Rebel
    XT.

    Thanks in advance.

    Sandy.
     
    Sandy Bloom, Ph.D., Jan 19, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sandy Bloom, Ph.D.

    Frank ess Guest

    They work excellent.

    It is NOT "poor" quality; it is just not "excellent" quality.

    You'll find plenty discussion of both points in Googling groups, with
    appropriate eywords.
     
    Frank ess, Jan 19, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sandy Bloom, Ph.D.

    paul.busse Guest

    I'm quite pleased with the two I have--28-135 & 75-300.

    The kit lens that came with my 300D, which I kept when I upgraded to
    350D, gives very good results for it price.

    Paul B.
     
    paul.busse, Jan 19, 2006
    #3
  4. Sandy Bloom, Ph.D.

    wilt Guest

    You can put IS on poor optics, mediocre optics and fantastic optics!
    IS merely allows you to hold a camera with less visible shake when
    using slower shutter speeds.

    It is a different question about whether a particular IS lens has
    terrific or mediocre optical performance! Many IS lenses are L
    lenses, which most will say perform very well, yet there are also IS
    lenses that some say are not standout performers. I have heard
    comparisons from owners that say the 17-85 IS lens performs as well as
    their 24-70L or 70-200L at same focal length, while some published
    reports are ho-hum on the 17-85! Go figure.
     
    wilt, Jan 19, 2006
    #4
  5. Sandy Bloom, Ph.D.

    C J Southern Guest

    Generally they allow you to shoot up to 3 stops slower - so something that
    would have required 1/200 can be shot at 1/25 - and that's one hell of a
    difference.

    Others seem to disagree with me on this, but once I got my first "L" series
    lens (and tried it), the only thing that stopped me kicking the "hunk of
    junk" kit lens that came with the camera into orbit was the fact that
    someone very kindly gave me $50 for it. 'nuf said.
     
    C J Southern, Jan 19, 2006
    #5
  6. Sandy Bloom, Ph.D.

    Ron Recer Guest

    I have three lens for my 10D, all are Canon IS and I wouldn't buy any
    telephoto lens that wasn't IS. I have the 28-135, 75-300 and 100-400L. The
    L lens is, in my opinion, noticeably better than the 75-300, but not the 3.5
    times better that the price difference would indicate.

    Ron
     
    Ron Recer, Jan 20, 2006
    #6
    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.