Canon 24-70 2.8
Mar 10, 2017 21:19:42 #
Mar 10, 2017 21:22:42 #
dnash wrote:
How big an issue is it that this lens doesn't have IS?
Never miss it.
Mar 10, 2017 21:31:49 #
No issue, whatsoever. I've been using one for some 4 years and seldom miss a shot with it.
Mar 10, 2017 21:43:48 #
Love mine, no problems at all.
dnash wrote:
How big an issue is it that this lens doesn't have IS?
Mar 10, 2017 22:11:20 #
dnash wrote:
How big an issue is it that this lens doesn't have IS?
Some of Canon's best lenses do not have it. One of the most popular lenses has it as an option. Here is a question. If IS is so important why does it have and "OFF" position?
Mar 10, 2017 22:15:57 #
davidrb wrote:
Some of Canon's best lenses do not have it. One of the most popular lenses has it as an option. Here is a question. If IS is so important why does it have and "OFF" position?
FYI - If you are panning or tracking (particularly with a telephoto lens), for instance a flying bird, IS will try to compensate for the movement of the lens while panning. Kills the photo. IS should be of in that situation.
Mar 10, 2017 22:21:18 #
davidrb wrote:
Some of Canon's best lenses do not have it. One of the most popular lenses has it as an option. Here is a question. If IS is so important why does it have and "OFF" position?
They recommend you turn it off when mounting on a tripod.
Also if you are trying to shoot high shutter speed, fast moving objects that are far away...activating the IS as you focus while swinging the camera to track the object will cause the viewfinder to "jump around" as the IS tries to stabilize your camera....you are effectively fighting the IS at the moment and its hard to track the object through the viewfinder (only an issue with longer telephoto lense and not the 24-70)
Generally, IS is good for low light, motionless photos....amazing how low you can reduce the shutter speed and still get sharp photos.
I have the F4 IS and have used the 2.8. I dont think you will miss the IS unless you are photographing stills in low light....which for me is very rare.
All things being equal, I would take the 2.8 but happy with the F4 IS too...
Mar 10, 2017 22:25:07 #
Mar 10, 2017 22:27:26 #
dugole wrote:
FYI - If you are panning or tracking (particularly with a telephoto lens), for instance a flying bird, IS will try to compensate for the movement of the lens while panning. Kills the photo. IS should be of in that situation.
For panning or tracking IS mode 3 is used. This operates IS only at the moment of open shutter. Eliminates the worry of whether or not it should be used when tripod mounted.
Mar 10, 2017 22:31:30 #
davidrb wrote:
For panning or tracking IS mode 3 is used. This operates IS only at the moment of open shutter. Eliminates the worry of whether or not it should be used when tripod mounted.
David - I was never really clued in about using Mode 3 (my EF 100-400 Mk II), It doesn't compensate for the panning movement? What would be the difference between Mode 3 and using IS turned off?
Mar 10, 2017 23:08:11 #
dugole wrote:
David - I was never really clued in about using Mode 3 (my EF 100-400 Mk II), It doesn't compensate for the panning movement? What would be the difference between Mode 3 and using IS turned off?
From Canon:Newly Added IS Mode 3: The new IS II super-telephoto lenses are the first to introduce Canon’s new IS Mode 3. This new stabilization mode is similar to IS Mode 2 in the respect that it can detect and correct for panning by shutting off IS correction in the panning direction, but the difference is that IS correction occurs only during the actual exposure in IS Mode 3. (As in IS Modes 1 and 2, camera shake and panning detection occurs whenever the shutter button is pressed halfway.) As a result, the image in the viewfinder moves more naturally while panning, and battery power is conserved. This feature is expected to be welcomed by sports photographers as well as those who photograph birds in flight.*
Hope this helps.
Mar 11, 2017 06:24:07 #
dnash wrote:
How big an issue is it that this lens doesn't have IS?
For me the IS was a major factor and why I chose the 24-105L.
I don't need a low light sports lens though and the extra rang is far more important and the IS more than makes up for the aperture difference.
But could never live without the extra range.
Mar 11, 2017 06:39:18 #
dnash wrote:
How big an issue is it that this lens doesn't have IS?
I have that lens and it's not a problem at all.
Mar 11, 2017 07:52:50 #
At f2.8 and with the higher ISO capabilities of today's DSLRs I don't miss IS, especially in the wide to normal/med. telephoto focal lengths.
Mar 11, 2017 07:56:11 #
I had the first version, sold it and purchased II about 2 years ago. I have not seen the absence of IS an issue. I'm 80 and have slight Parkinson's in my right hand. It's my goto lens on my 5D MIII.
Mark
Mark
dnash wrote:
How big an issue is it that this lens doesn't have IS?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.