Own the 70-200mm f/4 L without (IS). It is basically silent. Just bought the (IS) version (used) sounds like there's a faint click sound after I take a pic. Is there something in the lens for the image stabilizer that causes that? Never had the (IS) before and don't know if that's normal. Any help would be appreciated.
I have a 70-200 mm 2.8 IS and it is alittle noisy and vibrates when it's focusing. You get use to it. It's a great lens for outside shots.
Ifreezeu wrote:
Own the 70-200mm f/4 L without (IS). It is basically silent. Just bought the (IS) version (used) sounds like there's a faint click sound after I take a pic. Is there something in the lens for the image stabilizer that causes that? Never had the (IS) before and don't know if that's normal. Any help would be appreciated.
I have the 70-200 f 4L IS and it does the same thing....its normal .....
Any autofocus lens will make noise when the Auto Focus is locking and focusing on the subject. The larger the lens in your case the 70-200 you may hear the lens motor selecting the AF points. Don't worry not only will you get used to the slight noise your lens is probably working correctly, hint Canon lens contain the autofocus mechanism in the lens, and image stabilization features in the lens itself, vs Nikon in some instances these features are within the camera body. Hence the Canon ESM or Canon Electronic motor series.
SteveH
Loc: Putnam Valley NY & Boynton Beach, Fla
I have the same non IS L lense as you and am thinking of getting the IS version. Are you otherwise happy with the trade you made?
I am debating between the 2.8 and F4.o versions. I know the 2.8 is more expensive and heavier but I want to blurr the backrounds on portrait shots.
Appreciate your comments.
Thanks everyone for the feedback. I feel better knowing a little sound is normal. Steve I love both lenes pic quality is great. I went with the (IS) because I shoot a lot of racing and kids sports and the paning ability of the (IS) is what I needed. As for the f/2.8 to the f/4 I chose the f/4 because I shoot outside usually in the sun. The f/4 produces excellent bokeh also. The price factor also played a slight role too.....
Anyone dealing with Canon 70/80 -200 zooms needs to read Ken Rockwell's reviews at kenrockwell.com - very thorough and unbiased !
phoenix
Loc: England, but currently living in AZ
FYI... I.S. is near useless (or at least no advantage) if you are shooting sports or moving subjects. It's IMAGE STABILIZATION is designed to prevent camera shake - useful with static subjects but with moving subjects you're going to be using higher shutter speeds anyhow. You've probably noticed that the World doesn't slow down when someone uses an IS lens!
Ifreezeu wrote:
Own the 70-200mm f/4 L without (IS). It is basically silent. Just bought the (IS) version (used) sounds like there's a faint click sound after I take a pic. Is there something in the lens for the image stabilizer that causes that? Never had the (IS) before and don't know if that's normal. Any help would be appreciated.
I have the same f4L IS. I believe the slight click you hear is the IS turning on and off, not the auto focus. Try it with IS turned off, only the autofocus is audible, and barely.
Thanks miseanseo, That's what I was hearing. This is why I love this site. You can always find an answer.
The IS version of the F4 L has a different optical formula in addition to having IS . Ken Rockwell claims it is slightly sharper ( if that is possible ! ).
It is my understanding that IS actually a disadvantage if you use a monopod or tripod when shooting, and I have a Tamron 70 - 200 f/2.8. My understanding is also that the Tamron is a little lighter than the Canon 70 -200, and I can't imagine using either for very long without a mono- or tripod. Maybe you shouldn't use IS when shooting with that lens and instead get a mono/tripod?
Photo-Al wrote:
It is my understanding that IS actually a disadvantage if you use a monopod or tripod when shooting, and I have a Tamron 70 - 200 f/2.8. My understanding is also that the Tamron is a little lighter than the Canon 70 -200, and I can't imagine using either for very long without a mono- or tripod. Maybe you shouldn't use IS when shooting with that lens and instead get a mono/tripod?
You're suppose to turn IS off when you use a tripod. It just wastes your battery. I use my lens quite often without a tripod especially when I'm travelling so I definitely think the IS is useful. Besides it helps to build up your arm muscles!!
SteveH wrote:
I have the same non IS L lense as you and am thinking of getting the IS version. Are you otherwise happy with the trade you made?
I am debating between the 2.8 and F4.o versions. I know the 2.8 is more expensive and heavier but I want to blurr the backrounds on portrait shots.
Appreciate your comments.
I owned the F:4 with IS and sold it. Then I purchased the F:2.8 with IS and later I sold it to reduce my equipment inventory as I hit my 80's. I did not witness any of the noises that are discribed here. Both L lenses have their place in the photography world. But overall, in my opinion, the F:2.8 is more beneficial and more expensive.
Bulach
phoenix wrote:
FYI... I.S. is near useless (or at least no advantage) if you are shooting sports or moving subjects. It's IMAGE STABILIZATION is designed to prevent camera shake - useful with static subjects but with moving subjects you're going to be using higher shutter speeds anyhow. You've probably noticed that the World doesn't slow down when someone uses an IS lens!
It is VERY useful, since Canon has two modes,
1 - standard IS and
2 - tracking mode
2 - is designed specifically for tracking moving subjects, works very well.
GT
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.