70-200 2.8L IS Question

amonte172230

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
416
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO, US
Talking to some people I have been shooting with and we got to talking about the 70-200 2.8 L IS lens. One guy said that a Canon rep told him that when you shoot faster than 1/100 shutter speed basically the IS is useless and could actually start to cause blur like if you had it on a tripod.
Has anyone else ever heeard this?

--
Sincerely,
C. Young
[email protected]

http://photography.digitalinkllc.com
http://www.digitalinkllc.com
 
Talking to some people I have been shooting with and we got to
talking about the 70-200 2.8 L IS lens. One guy said that a Canon
rep told him that when you shoot faster than 1/100 shutter speed
basically the IS is useless and could actually start to cause blur
like if you had it on a tripod.
Has anyone else ever heeard this?
Not sure that you need to use "IS" when on a tripod and shooting faster than 1/100. I only use mine with slow shutters hand held.

Great lens!
 
I think 1/100 is quite an optimistic limit. I'd say more like 1/300 or thereabout, depending on the body and the level of pixelpeeping.

If you only print at 10x15 cm you can probably get away with 1/100 without IS, but not if you print at 30x45 cm.
Personally I always leave IS on.

Just think about it: if the IS can make the image steady for shutterspeeds of 1/50, how would it cause image degradation when you only use a fraction of that time? (the lens does not know the exposure time!)

--
Robert Lejeune
http://www.pbase.com/rlejeune
 
Kinda what I am getting at.

I am thinking of getting the 70-200 2.8L IS as a close up lens to
compliment my 300 2.8 L and wondering if i should pay of the IS.
I shoot on a monopod and never under 1/250 shutter. I mean would I
even use the IS? If not why pay the extra $600 or so for it.
Yeah, I mean "IS" (image stabilizing) is designed for the slow shutter and camera shake. If your shooting 1/250 and above I don't see the point.
 
--If you are using a tripod or Monopod you shouldn't have the IS on! See manual. Also this question should be in the lens forum.

Sean Byrne.
 
When I first got my 1DMkII and my 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS I did a test to see if at higher shutter speeds, if there were any diffs from IS being on or off and I found that in most cases the shots w/o IS on were slightly sharper, once the shutter speeds were high enough that I didn't need IS anyway. I also had the IS system go nuts and vibrate, causing the images to be a total blur, when on a tripod. If it isn't needed I always try to turn it off...
--
http://iciclelanding.com/aperture?user=385&view=albumlist
 
I've been using this lens since January. If you really never go below 1/250th and nearly always use a monopod then I think you don't necessarily need IS. But at 1/100th I would say the IS is still useful. For slower shutter speeds its outrageous what you can sometimes get away with handholding!

Of course, the old rule of thumb is you can reliably handhold a lens and still get a sharp picture at a shutter speed equivalent to 1/focal length. eg. if you have a 100mm lens then you could get away with 1/100th sec but its touch and go with slower speeds. I've always found I could handhold slightly slower speeds than this rule but it all depends how steady your hands are. Nowadays it also depends how closely the pixels are packed into your sensor. The 20d is more prone to shake than the 1d mkII for example because its pixels are more densely packed onto the sensor (same number of pixels on a smaller chip). So to some extent it depends on the camera too.

All the 70-200L lenses in Canon's range have a great reputation. I can definitely vouch for the sharpness of the 2.8 IS.

While I haven't done a proper test, I did have some results from a 300mm f4LIS that weren't as sharp as I thought they should have been. These were taken at about 1/160th resting on a beanbag. I suspect the softness in the images came from the IS operating on a picture which was essentially already steady. The 70-200 has a later version of IS which I think is supposed to cope better when tripod mounted but I turn it off on a tripod. Both these lenses have 2 IS modes: one for handheld where shake can be in any direction and one for panning where shake is only expected in one plane. Or of course you can turn the IS off. I do a fair bit of photography on boats. The IS has definitely proved its worth there.

So to sum up. On a monopod at 1/250th I don't think you will see much benefit from IS and I do think that it may actually degrade the image. If you handhold at 1/100th sec with the lens set at 200mm the IS will probably improve sharpness. If you handhold with the lens set at the wider end (70mm) shake might have been fairly negligible anyway so you might not see much benefit, If you use a tripod, then unless your lens is 500mm or more when shake can be a problem even on camera supports, then do not use IS.
 
I read somewhere on the Web that Canon newer IS lenses can detect when they are stable on a tripod and that it OK to leave IS on. The 70-200mm F2.8 L IS is one of these lenses. There is a lot of wrong information on the Web you may want ti search Canon Web site about that fact.
--
JJMack
 
diga wrote:
...
Of course, the old rule of thumb is you can reliably handhold a
lens and still get a sharp picture at a shutter speed equivalent to
1/focal length. eg. if you have a 100mm lens then you could get
away with 1/100th sec but its touch and go with slower speeds
...

That depends on whether you have a 5D or a 1D camera. With the 1D you have to take the 1.3 into account.
 
yep, true - which is why the next couple of sentences in my message go on about pixel density!
;-)
 
forgot to add.....

and its pixel density that matters because the extra magnification from the smaller chip in the 1D vs 5D is an illusion. The lens itself isn't magnifying anymore, its just that the 1D only records the central portion of the image projected by the lens compared to 5d which records most of the image projected through the lens.

(not sure whether you were referring to pixels or extra "magnification")
 
The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS has tripod-detecting IS. If you use it on a tripod or monopod the IS is used to dampen vibrations from the shutter and mirror etc., as well as normal stabilization duties.

Everyone I know who shoots professionally with the 70-200 IS leaves the IS on all the time unless they're trying to conserve batteries.

So long as you give the IS the amount of time it needs to stabilize (half a second to a second on the 70-200) then there is no way it could contribute to blurring of the picture over and above what would be there through motion of the camera.
 
The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS has tripod-detecting IS. If you use it on a
tripod or monopod the IS is used to dampen vibrations from the
shutter and mirror etc., as well as normal stabilization duties.

Everyone I know who shoots professionally with the 70-200 IS leaves
the IS on all the time unless they're trying to conserve batteries.

So long as you give the IS the amount of time it needs to stabilize
(half a second to a second on the 70-200) then there is no way it
could contribute to blurring of the picture over and above what
would be there through motion of the camera.
Don't think you want to wait 1/2 second if you shooting fast action!
So I have to disagree about ALL pro's leaving IS on all the time.
 
You mean pro don't pan or compose their Images. I thought so...
--
JJMack
 
So you think we point the camera where we want it and stuff the shutter button down without even waiting for focus confirmation?
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top