but yeah i PROMISE u don't need IS. not only do u not need it but it actually drains ur battery faster too.

 

im interested in how IS helps you in the stills.. ive tried it with it on/off for the car shots and sometimes shots of people and i havent found it very useful/not noticable.. are there certain situations that you find that it works? tips/tricks? maybe im using it wrong

<- slightly stupid

 

no i am in the same boat mike.

 

I find it works to my advantage when working with longer focal lengths, since any camera movement is magnified when zoomed in on a subject.

At shorter lengths (<100mm) I find it to be unnecessary except in lower light situations.

I've shot all the way down to 1/15 sec with IS in low light and still produced a sharp photo.

There's also a function, at least on my 70-200, that IS is used only to stabilize the photo vertically for panning shots.

It's a nice feature to have in your arsenal.

 

i have IS on one or two of my lenses and turned it off. Think I actually heard that it can hurt under some situations.

 

I see a lot of people arguing about is on a "telephoto"

IS does indeed provide me with sharper images because the type of photos I do, tripods and flash are not practical.

anyhow

anyone wondering what IS does read this article


http://photo.net/canon/70-200

it is complete with image test examples.

cheers

 

hmm.. that makes sense.. cause the IS lens i use most is my 17-85 EFS and cause i usually shoot in the wider range i may not pick up any differences.. but i think IS might be hurting me when i do my rig/rolling shots.. gotta try it this weekend..

the low light on the other had i find it not very helpful/no difference. i tried shooting at 800 for less grain with the 17-85 wide open at 4.5 and it was still giving me some blur despite being as still as possible. maybe im just being stupid..

 

With some lenses when you put them on a tripod and leave the IS on, it'll try compensating for its own compensation and actually CAUSE movement and a blurry picture. I have to say that I love IS on my 100-400L as it makes the lens more versatile (able to shoot down around 1/250 rather than up around 1/500) and the 17-55 because I can handhold 17mm shots at around .8 second without a problem, and even at 55mm they come out fine around 1/4 second exposure.

I WILL say however, that my 180L macro wouldn't benefit from IS at all. That is one lens that I've never used and said "man I wish this had IS". Just a well balanced piece of glass!

Essentially IS isn't necessary, but it DOES help. If ya don't need the help, bully for you, but since the technology is there (and if I can afford it), I'll take advantage of it.

 

on approach into Rome.



Ryan Air flight attendants watching one of their birds takeoff.

 

^I bet you love your job. I need to travel more.

 

Just got my tracking number for my new 70-200mm f/4.0L and 50mm f/1.8 II!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I hate you Shane.

 

i got a new 28-80mm f2.8 and 50mm 1.8 also! cant wait for them to get here friday.

Already have a 17-30mm that is now discontinued from what i hear and a 70-200 2.8 macro

 

Hey what's this EOS Squad I've been seeing in peoples' sigs lately? Just something that all the Canon users are doing?

 

yeah if u shoot Canon then ur in the EOS SQUAD, if u shoot Nikon u don't tell anybody. ha ha

 

We don't need a squad, we're cool on our own.

 

or antisocial and u don't even like each other. ha ha

 

Nah the majority of people in our local crew shoots Nikon. We have a few Canon shooters that gravitated towards us when they witnessed our coolness haha.

 

or they just feel bad

 

I'm guessing they felt you guys needed a friend so they decided to help you out. I doubt they go out in public with you Nikon guys much.

Crazy Kids.