bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

just a thought,
if you have a good camera store near by,try a couple of tripods and monopods there.they will probably let you take some shots in front of the store.take a bunch,check them out at home.if you don't get some really sharp pictures, them try some of the other ideas.by the way, outdoors i shoot 100 or 200 iso,and f 8.0 for most stills. a monopod works great for moving around.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

[quote=Rangerfan]I have been shooting portraits with my Canon 70-200 f2.8L Non-IS lens. I keep the iso at about 100 to keep it sharp, as I find that the higher iso the grainier the pics. I have been shooting outdoors, so I was thinking the light would be sufficient. However, because I am handholding and this is a giant heavy lens, I am not getting sharp pics in the least. Also, I am really getting in pet photography. I was wondering if it is because
1. I am handholding and there is camera shake?
2. The iso is still too low, causing the shutterspeed to be too slow?
3. I really need an is lens?
Also, I am finding that this lens, although wonderful as it is, is not the best choice for what I do. I am thinking of selling it and getting either the 24-70 or the 17-55. Any thoughts??? The 24-70 is non-IS and the 17-55 is IS. I don't want to make the same mistake again not getting IS if I am a handholder and not a tripod user.[/quote

Ranger,
I am a fashion photographer so I use that lens that you have almost all the time. You have to use a tripod or monopod. You do not have the ability to handhold that lens at the ISO you say you are using. Do what is necessary get a tripod, that is the answer. Even if you switch to the 24-70 still use a tripod. That is the definitive answer I don't care what anyone else says, oh I probably shoot on average 3000 portraits a year with models.

JJRoss0 Loc: Lexington, KY

I agree with "Ouch". I've always been under the belief that you buy the best you can afford. Time, patience and experience with your equipment are how you learn to use them properly.

BOB Loc: Texas

I have a 24-70 it a great lemds it is heavy but it's also very short and the 70 mm is a good reach for all around photography ..And don't forgrt it a "fast 2.8"

joec Loc: Central Texas, USA

I am using a Canon Rebel T2i. Right now it I only have the budget for 1 expensive lens. I have my kit lens (18-55), a 50-300, a 50 1.8, and the 70-200. I got a great deal on the 70-200 on ebay, so my thinking was if I can have ONLY one really good lens what would be the best for me. I could easily sell the 70-200 on ebay for what I bought it for.[/quote]

Rangerfan, you may already know this, but keep in mind that the reciprocal guideline (1/focal length for shutter speed) is based on EFFECTIVE focal length. For your camera 200mm x 1.6 = 320, so the calculation would yield 1/320, 1/400 to be on the safe side. But if you're shooting at 100, 1/160 or 1/200 should be sufficient.

Joe

joec Loc: Central Texas, USA

Amen!

Joe

digicamking Loc: Raleigh, NC

I would suggest the Canon 24 - 105 F4L IS. It is a lens I use 90% of the time. It is a great portrait lens and very sharp. However, the 70 - 200 is a great lens but heavy and should be used with a tripod or at least a monopod
for slow shutter speeds.

DK Loc: SD

I would go with an IS lens. As far as I am concerned, IS lens are the best!! Especially since I hate tripods. You can hand hold in most instances except really low light situations.

DK Loc: SD

I would go with an IS lens. As far as I am concerned, IS lens are the best!! Especially since I hate tripods. You can hand hold in most instances except really low light situations.

Rangerfan

[quote=George H][quote=Rangerfan]I have been shooting portraits with my Canon 70-200 f2.8L Non-IS lens. I keep the iso at about 100 to keep it sharp, as I find that the higher iso the grainier the pics. I have been shooting outdoors, so I was thinking the light would be sufficient. However, because I am handholding and this is a giant heavy lens, I am not getting sharp pics in the least. Also, I am really getting in pet photography. I was wondering if it is because
1. I am handholding and there is camera shake?
2. The iso is still too low, causing the shutterspeed to be too slow?
3. I really need an is lens?
Also, I am finding that this lens, although wonderful as it is, is not the best choice for what I do. I am thinking of selling it and getting either the 24-70 or the 17-55. Any thoughts??? The 24-70 is non-IS and the 17-55 is IS. I don't want to make the same mistake again not getting IS if I am a handholder and not a tripod user.[/quote

Ranger,
I am a fashion photographer so I use that lens that you have almost all the time. You have to use a tripod or monopod. You do not have the ability to handhold that lens at the ISO you say you are using. Do what is necessary get a tripod, that is the answer. Even if you switch to the 24-70 still use a tripod. That is the definitive answer I don't care what anyone else says, oh I probably shoot on average 3000 portraits a year with models.[/quote]

Thanks. I have a tripod, but I feel it really limits me. I think I may get a monopod. I think that will be more mobile.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

DK,
You may hate them, but they are another tool that is necessary if you want really tack sharp photos at the ISO he states he is using. I don't care how good someone thinks they can hand hold, you can't hold better than a tripod.

DK Loc: SD

It depends on the situation. In most of the situations where I shoot, I get tack sharp images hand holding with the IS lenses. Yes, I do use a tripod in low light situations, but I still don't like them. Some places do not allow tripods.

Rangerfan

I agree that a tripod will give you the sharpest. But I also find them to be limiting. Guess it depends on what your situation is. We are all different. That's what makes photography art. If you shoot subjects that are not still in the least, a tripod is a hinderence. Maybe a monopod will be better. I'll soon find out, cuz I'm gettin' one!

silver Loc: Santa Monica Ca.

If I were you I would make the investment in a good tripod. You have good equipment you just have yo use it properly. I see so many people hand holding there heavy lenses and the solution is always that they should be using a tripod. There are many people who say that they get great results hand holding there cameras but it is not for everybody. I am a professional photographer for 35 years and I do 90% of my work with a tripod. I dont care what anybody says, a tripod will make you a much better photographer.

Rangerfan

I have a tripod. I will practice with it. Thanks. What are your thoughts on a monopod?