How good is Canon IS Lens Technology

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

  1. Mark Williams

    ½ Confused Guest

    I'd say so! One chasing you to get the lens back...
    the other being chased by you. Now that's entertainment!

    (good luck with that... heh)

    Jeff
     
    ½ Confused, Aug 18, 2006
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Mark Williams

    ½ Confused Guest

    I'll use it for tripod friendly concerts and events. Which means not
    very often because the 70-200 f2.8L IS and 50mm f1.4 are my choices
    for those conditions.
    Yeah... one deals with life as it comes. Sometimes it's muscle freeze
    and at others it's shakey.
    Indeed! I spent time the last couple weeks going back in time, and
    the IS lenses do compensate far more than expected. Maybe it's time
    to sell a few lenses... ;)

    Jeff
     
    ½ Confused, Aug 18, 2006
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mark Williams

    ½ Confused Guest

    Hmm. Oh! Never needed it, but it's cheap enough to try with all my
    lenses if it works! Thanks! Will let you know how it works out.

    ;-()

    Jeff
     
    ½ Confused, Aug 18, 2006
    #43
  4. Mark Williams

    Tiny Tim Guest

    I missed the start of this thread so apologies if this has been posted
    already but there is a very clear example of the benefits of Canon's IS in
    this review of the Canon 17-85mm EF-S lens -
    http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef-s_17-85_review_3.html. I
    have this lens and find the IS of great benefit.
     
    Tiny Tim, Aug 18, 2006
    #44
  5. I think I may have endorsed that request a year or two back - but that
    was before I realised just how much high-ISO noise performance had
    improved. I think f/2.8 would mean a lens about 25-50% heavier.

    David
     
    David Littlewood, Aug 18, 2006
    #45
  6. Mark Williams

    gypsy3001 Guest

    My parkinsons shake is getting worse. I've been blurring and double
    An IS lens might give you a higher percentage of useable shots, but an
    tripod and a off-camera release will probably guarantee an even higher
    percentage.

    Chieh
     
    gypsy3001, Aug 18, 2006
    #46
  7. Very true, but not all situations will wait for you to setup a tripod, wait
    for vibration to settle and remotely trigger your camera for the sharppest
    possible image. It is these types of situations that IS/VR offer you more
    opportunity to get a decent picture.
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Aug 18, 2006
    #47
  8. Mark Williams

    SkipM Guest

    Indeed, and, after finally getting a chance to shoot with it all day, today,
    I'd have to say that I'm quite happy with the f4 aperture. The lens isn't
    all that much lighter, according to the specs I've read, but the difference
    in weight seems to hit a critical spot with me, it just seems to by much
    more "wieldy" than the 24-70 f2.8L
     
    SkipM, Aug 19, 2006
    #48
  9. Mark Williams

    ½ Confused Guest

    I remember, but I agree, for a walk-about f4 is fine.

    Jeff
     
    ½ Confused, Aug 19, 2006
    #49
  10. Mark Williams

    ½ Confused Guest

    That's what I was going to say. I'll often head out in areas in my
    wheelchair when a tripod or monopod isn't feasible.

    Jeff
     
    ½ Confused, Aug 19, 2006
    #50
    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.