Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > How effective is IS?

Reply
Thread Tools

How effective is IS?

 
 
Mike H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2005
I do some aerial photography (non-professional, but serious). At the level of work
I do, I cannot come anywhere near justifying a real gyro-stabilized rig, but I could
swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS lens. I could, that is, if it will really make
a difference. Has anyone used this (or similar) lens for this kind of use?? If
so, how effective is the IS in this application? (I'm a Canon user from WAY back,
and would prefer to stay with Canon, but would listen to other viewpoints...)
Thanks
Mike

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John_B
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2005
Mike,
In my opinion having IS on a 17-85 lens
is useless!

I only have one lens with IS, my Canon
EF 100-400L IS.
Now hand holding a 400mm is much harder
then a 85mm lens (4 times bigger, weight
and zoom). I never need IS (if it even
existed) for my macro/portrait lens EF
100mm f/2.8 or my 17-40L so I don't
recommend it.

Get a prime its best (if you can).

What lens do you do aerial with now?

"Mike H" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
in message
news:5RYye.25920$(E-Mail Removed)
outh.net...
> I do some aerial photography

(non-professional, but serious). At the
level of work
> I do, I cannot come anywhere near

justifying a real gyro-stabilized rig,
but I could
> swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS

lens. I could, that is, if it will
really make
> a difference. Has anyone used this

(or similar) lens for this kind of use??
If
> so, how effective is the IS in this

application? (I'm a Canon user from WAY
back,
> and would prefer to stay with Canon,

but would listen to other viewpoints...)
> Thanks
> Mike
>




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2005

"John_B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:42cc5d4b$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mike,
> In my opinion having IS on a 17-85 lens
> is useless!


--Spoken like someone who either hasn't used it, or who hasn't learned how
to take advantage of it.

I use IS on four lenses (two of which I don't have any more), but the 28-135
IS is absolutely useful at the wide end...especially in vibration-prone
situations like on a vehicle, boat, or plane. I've hend-held dark shots at
1/8th second, and even 1/4th second that are quite usable, and would hav
otherwise been trash.

Primes are great and sharp when on a stationary base/tripod/steady hand, but
do NOTHING to deal with camera shake or vibrations that reach the lens.

I would highly recommend IS if you are hand-holding shots from a plane.


>
> I only have one lens with IS, my Canon
> EF 100-400L IS.
> Now hand holding a 400mm is much harder
> then a 85mm lens (4 times bigger, weight
> and zoom). I never need IS (if it even
> existed) for my macro/portrait lens EF
> 100mm f/2.8 or my 17-40L so I don't
> recommend it.
>
> Get a prime its best (if you can).
>
> What lens do you do aerial with now?
>
> "Mike H" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> in message
> news:5RYye.25920$(E-Mail Removed)
> outh.net...
>> I do some aerial photography

> (non-professional, but serious). At the
> level of work
>> I do, I cannot come anywhere near

> justifying a real gyro-stabilized rig,
> but I could
>> swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS

> lens. I could, that is, if it will
> really make
>> a difference. Has anyone used this

> (or similar) lens for this kind of use??
> If
>> so, how effective is the IS in this

> application? (I'm a Canon user from WAY
> back,
>> and would prefer to stay with Canon,

> but would listen to other viewpoints...)
>> Thanks
>> Mike
>>

>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
> News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
> Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
> =----



 
Reply With Quote
 
Stacey
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005
Mike H wrote:

> I do some aerial photography (non-professional, but serious). At the
> level of work I do, I cannot come anywhere near justifying a real
> gyro-stabilized rig, but I could
> swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS lens.


Sounds like it helps.

http://www.websiteoptimization.com/s...ak/stabilizer/

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...ns&btnG=Search
--

Stacey
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005
MarkČ wrote:
> "John_B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:42cc5d4b$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>Mike,
>>In my opinion having IS on a 17-85 lens
>>is useless!

>
>
> --Spoken like someone who either hasn't used it, or who hasn't learned how
> to take advantage of it.
>
> I use IS on four lenses (two of which I don't have any more), but the 28-135
> IS is absolutely useful at the wide end...especially in vibration-prone
> situations like on a vehicle, boat, or plane. I've hend-held dark shots at
> 1/8th second, and even 1/4th second that are quite usable, and would hav
> otherwise been trash.
>
> Primes are great and sharp when on a stationary base/tripod/steady hand, but
> do NOTHING to deal with camera shake or vibrations that reach the lens.
>
> I would highly recommend IS if you are hand-holding shots from a plane.


I would like to second MarkČ's opinion. This is exactly my
experience too. I have 4 IS lenses: 28-135 IS, 100-400 L IS,
300 f/4 L IS, and 500 f/4 L IS. I've used the 28-135 hand
held a lot with IS from boats, planes, horseback, dark
churches (getting sharp images at 1/8 second). I will not buy
another lens unless it is IS or is unique and no IS is
available.

Roger Clark
photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com
>
>
>
>>I only have one lens with IS, my Canon
>>EF 100-400L IS.
>>Now hand holding a 400mm is much harder
>>then a 85mm lens (4 times bigger, weight
>>and zoom). I never need IS (if it even
>>existed) for my macro/portrait lens EF
>>100mm f/2.8 or my 17-40L so I don't
>>recommend it.
>>
>>Get a prime its best (if you can).
>>
>>What lens do you do aerial with now?
>>
>>"Mike H" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>>in message
>>news:5RYye.25920$(E-Mail Removed)
>>outh.net...
>>
>>>I do some aerial photography

>>
>>(non-professional, but serious). At the
>>level of work
>>
>>>I do, I cannot come anywhere near

>>
>>justifying a real gyro-stabilized rig,
>>but I could
>>
>>>swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS

>>
>>lens. I could, that is, if it will
>>really make
>>
>>> a difference. Has anyone used this

>>
>>(or similar) lens for this kind of use??
>>If
>>
>>>so, how effective is the IS in this

>>
>>application? (I'm a Canon user from WAY
>>back,
>>
>>>and would prefer to stay with Canon,

>>
>>but would listen to other viewpoints...)
>>
>>>Thanks
>>>Mike

 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005
>I will not buy another lens unless it is IS or is unique and no IS is available.

When Canon comes out with a new MP-E Macro lens with IS, I'm all over
it!

 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005

"Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> >I will not buy another lens unless it is IS or is unique and no IS is
> >available.

>
> When Canon comes out with a new MP-E Macro lens with IS, I'm all over
> it!


Of all the hand-holding challenges, that lens has to be a real doozie...


 
Reply With Quote
 
stefan patric
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005
On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 18:23:27 -0400, Mike H wrote:

> I do some aerial photography (non-professional, but serious). At the
> level of work I do, I cannot come anywhere near justifying a real
> gyro-stabilized rig, but I could swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS lens.
> I could, that is, if it will really make
> a difference. Has anyone used this (or similar) lens for this kind of
> use?? If
> so, how effective is the IS in this application? (I'm a Canon user from
> WAY back, and would prefer to stay with Canon, but would listen to other
> viewpoints...) Thanks
> Mike


I suggest that you rent both a gyro to use with your current lenses, and
said IS lens to be used without the gyro. Shoot some shots without the
gyro and your current lenses for comparison. Which set up does a better
job? If you can afford it, buy it. If you can't, dream....

I've shot oblique aerials professionally for years (usually from a
helicopter and using a Hasselblad) without gyros or any type of
stabilization other than my body and get excellent results. The secret?
Relax the legs and buttocks to absorb vibration, tense the torso to create
a stable foundation for the arms, which are held slight away from the body
(the exact opposite of what is normally recommended to stabilize a camera)
to act as shock absorbers, hold your breath, shoot between your
heart beats. Also, shooting at the highest shutter speed you can helps
immensely.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Skip M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005
"John_B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:42cc5d4b$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mike,
> In my opinion having IS on a 17-85 lens
> is useless!
>
> I only have one lens with IS, my Canon
> EF 100-400L IS.
> Now hand holding a 400mm is much harder
> then a 85mm lens (4 times bigger, weight
> and zoom). I never need IS (if it even
> existed) for my macro/portrait lens EF
> 100mm f/2.8 or my 17-40L so I don't
> recommend it.
>
> Get a prime its best (if you can).
>
> What lens do you do aerial with now?
>


I never found IS useless on my 28-135 IS on a film camera, it does help,
even down to 50mm, where I've gotten sharp images at 1/4 second. Since the
17-85 has a similar image size to that when it's mounted on a 20D, results
should be similar, too.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-07-2005
Mike H <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:5RYye.25920$(E-Mail Removed):

> I do some aerial photography (non-professional, but serious). At the
> level of work I do, I cannot come anywhere near justifying a real
> gyro-stabilized rig, but I could swing a Canon D20s and the 17-85 IS
> lens. I could, that is, if it will really make
> a difference. Has anyone used this (or similar) lens for this kind
> of use?? If
> so, how effective is the IS in this application? (I'm a Canon user
> from WAY back, and would prefer to stay with Canon, but would listen
> to other viewpoints...) Thanks
> Mike


I have the 28-135 and usually turn the IS off for shooting motor racing
when I am panning. But for low light shots with static subjects I get
around the 2 stops that Canon claims.

I think that without IS you would need to shoot at a fairly high shutter
speed to avoid blur due to the vibrations of the plane. If you find the
need to shoot at 1/1000 sec or faster without IS then you should be able to
get acceptable results at 1/250 sec with IS - I would say that certainly
makes a difference. If at the wide end you can already shoot 1/200 sec
without IS, then that equates to being able to shoot at 1/50 sec with IS,
still a good improvement.

However it is worth noting that a good prime like a 50 f1.4 is much faster,
so you could just shoot at a shutter speed 2 stops faster. But of course
you will lose some depth of field when shooting at a wider aperture.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 25-June-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
"No proxy for" in firefox not effective guohan lu Firefox 0 11-19-2005 01:44 PM
Transaction based testbench - Effective encapsulation of the client 'transactors'? Andrew FPGA VHDL 14 10-05-2005 07:40 PM
Effective Email Marketing Joe Buick VHDL 0 11-29-2004 08:11 PM
Most effective way to use junk mail control? tenplay Firefox 4 07-14-2004 12:04 AM



Advertisments