IS on or off ?? I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left)...

russthepig Loc: Claremont, CA

I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left) looks a little sharper than the one with IS on. What do you think?
Rebel XTI
18-200 EFS
80mm
ISO 800
f7.1
160/

left IS off, right IS on

madcapmagishion

The one on the left looks a tad sharper to my old eyes!

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

The one on the left is definitely sharper. Don't know why...

travlnman46 Loc: Yakima WA

russthepig wrote:

I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left) looks a little sharper than the one with IS on. What do you think?
Rebel XTI
18-200 EFS
80mm
ISO 800
f7.1
160/

Hi russthepig: at full zoom neither one are exceptionally sharp, especially for something taken with an "L" series lens. I detected some hand shake in both photographs. At normal viewing the one with the IS on is a little sharper. Hope this helps.

russthepig Loc: Claremont, CA

These were not taken with an L lens. I was using a 18-200 EFS to test non image stabilization hand held at 80mm. The 24-70L I am thinking of getting is non IS. What I find interesting is the non IS image looks sharper

gmcase Loc: Galt's Gulch

Left is sharpest though both are soft. I think you would have to do several back to back shots and see if one condition is consistently sharper. Anything can happen with two shots.

Ugly Jake Loc: Sub-Rural Vermont

gmcase wrote:

Left is sharpest though both are soft. I think you would have to do several back to back shots and see if one condition is consistently sharper. Anything can happen with two shots.

I agree - handheld is a function of grip, posture, fatigue, excitement level, breath control, shutter technique, alcohol consumption, and many other factors (Wind, earthquake, etc).

vciro Loc: Wantagh, Long Island, NY

russthepig wrote:

I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left) looks a little sharper than the one with IS on. What do you think?
Rebel XTI
18-200 EFS
80mm
ISO 800
f7.1
160/

Were you using a tripod? The prevailing wisdom is that you should turn OFF the IS when using a tripod. If you weren't using a tripod, I would take more images with it ON and OFF and compare the lot. :-)

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

russthepig wrote:

I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left) looks a little sharper than the one with IS on. What do you think?
Rebel XTI
18-200 EFS
80mm
ISO 800
f7.1
160/

If you are attempting to hold the camera steady, you are NOT testing IS. IS only works when there is camera shake. You have to introduce shake into the test. However, getting the right amount of shake is tricky hand held.

Also, testing IS involves seeing whether the EXIF on each image changes with regard to automated exposure settings as IS is advertised as acquiring better stops of exposure. If the image on the right used a faster shutter speed, or a smaller aperture, then the IS accomplished that.

CAM1017 Loc: Chiloquin, Oregon

russthepig wrote:

I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left) looks a little sharper than the one with IS on. What do you think?
Rebel XTI
18-200 EFS
80mm
ISO 800
f7.1
160/

The one on the left with IS off does look sharper. Something else must be going on to make the difference. Not sure what.

Photogdog Loc: New Kensington, PA

russthepig wrote:

I am looking at the Canon 24-70 2.8L and wanted to test hand held without IS at 70mm. The image on the left is IS turned off, right is on. The image without IS (left) looks a little sharper than the one with IS on. What do you think?
Rebel XTI
18-200 EFS
80mm
ISO 800
f7.1
160/

Russ,

This was taken with the 24-70 f2.8L non-IS. It's not that good of a shot, but the salient point is that it was taken handheld with the light failing fast. I wanted to use a tripod, but really didn't have time to set it up.

ISO: 400
f5.6
1/32"
70mm

I jumped out of my car, ran to the observation deck & jammed myself against the guard rail (out of breath and nervous!). Again, while it ain't the greatest, I can live with this level of sharpness under those conitions.

PD

PD

5D MK II 24-70mm f2.8L, ISO 400, 70mm, f5.6, 1/32" Handheld, No IS

pigpen

Photogdog wrote:

quote=russthepig I am looking at the Canon 24-70 ... (show quote)

I love this city!

pigpen

I don't own the 24-70 (on the wish list), but was doing some research on the 70-200 f/2.8. I have read in a couple different "professional" reveiws, that the non IS lens ($1000 cheaper), is slightly sharper than the one with IS. The reason they give is the extra glass/elements needed for the IS. I can't tell you for sure, just what I read. If it is true with "L" glass, I'm sure it is true with a cheaper brand as well.