How important do you think IS is?

[Fedgrub]

When buying a lens, how highly do you value IS as a feature on your new lens?

Up until recently, I thought IS did a great job on my lenses. Now that I adjust the shutter speed and keep it low with IS off, I don't notice a difference (using my 100mm 2.8 Macro on non-macro subjects).

Thoughts?

[JM Tran]

When buying a lens, how highly do you value IS as a feature on your new lens?

Up until recently, I thought IS did a great job on my lenses. Now that I adjust the shutter speed and keep it low with IS off, I don't notice a difference (using my 100mm 2.8 Macro on non-macro subjects).

Thoughts?


it really depends on what you are doing, if you are having a high enough shutter speed obviously IS wont matter at all then.

but I am amazed at how many people have really bad shooting techniques ie. the way they hold a camera and control their breathing etc, so it would definitely help their keeper rates.

[Fedgrub]

I notice that some of the longer focal lengths eg 100-300/400 that there are no IS on these lenses. I would have thought it would be needed on these more than any others... Don't know how those users do it! :)

[Lance B]

I have a Nikon system, but the results are essentially the same as for Canon and therefore my comments would equally apply to Canon gear.

For telephoto lenses VR can be indespensible. I have taken sharp as a tack photos with my 300mm f2.8 + 2x TC on my D7000 using VR (IS) as low as 1/20sec and using a monopod! The rule of thumb for a FF sensor is to use a shutter speed of 1/focal length to avoid camera shake and for an APS C sensored camera this is 1/focal length x 1.5 due to the crop factor of 1.5(or 1.6 as in the case of Canon APS C cameras). So, in my case, a 300mm lens x 2 (for the TC - teleconverter) x 1.5 for crop factor of the camera = 1/900sec is required to avoid camera shake. So, using 1/20sec, this equates to 5.5 stops of extra low light ability - 1/40sec (1 stop), 1/80sec (2 stops), 1/160sec (3 stops), 1/320sec (4 stops), 1/640sec (5 stops) to 1/900sec which is about 1/2 a stop and therefore 5.5stops total!!. Here is the offending image:

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/137121613/original.jpg

I also use VR for some of my extreme wide angle shots for inside buildings, especially when I was in Europe for inside those dimly lit churches, cathedrals and castles etc. It means that you can shoot at a lower ISO or use a higher aperture number for bigger depth of field whether inside or outside depending on the light level. This one here was taken on my D700 (FF camera) uing my 16-35 f4 VR at 28mm and 1/3sec!!! Yes, that's 1/3rd sec HANDHELD! For 28mm on a FF camera, this should have been taken at 1/30sec, but @ 1/3sec it gave me 3.5 stops of extra handholdability. :)

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/125439034/original.jpg

Interestingly, I rarely find I require the VR (IS) in closer to standard focal length range, ie around the 50mm area.

[Fedgrub]

Great shots, Lance! Originally I had this thread written as IS/VR but changed it when I put it in the Canon section.

[kiwi]

I guess the marketing is that you'll achieve the same stability at three stops lower handheld than not handheld (assuming - and this is the BIGGIE that the subject is still)

so, I think it really does matter for appropriate subjects.

[Xenedis]

I consider IS to be desirable, and I have it in all the focal lengths I have from 70mm to 600mm.

However, there are some scenarios in which IS is not useful.

If you're shooting with a tripod, it's a feature best disabled.

The other important point about IS is that it only counters hand/camera movement; it will NOT freeze motion. The only way to freeze motion is with a sufficiently fast shutter speed, and to achieve that, you need light -- in both cases, IS does nothing.

My view is that if there's a choice between having IS and not having IS, I'll take IS every time.

[Roosta]

Could be wrong, but in good lighting conditions, (Not long exposure low light or night time shooting) you'd normally have the shutter speed match the focal length and adjust ISO accordingly. 300mm at 1/300 sec and so fourth.

But if you have IS and a good prime/zoom and use it in low/fading light and want to keep shutter speed up, it would be useful.

Your main question is better aimed at specific task/type/style of shoot and or related to a specific lens.



Is it aimed toward a lens your thinking of, as in like 100 mm F2.8 Macro IS or Non Is lens comparison?

[Fedgrub]

Could be wrong, but in good lighting conditions, (Not long exposure low light or night time shooting) you'd normally have the shutter speed match the focal length and adjust ISO accordingly. 300mm at 1/300 sec and so fourth.

But if you have IS and a good prime/zoom and use it in low/fading light and want to keep shutter speed up, it would be useful.

Your main question is better aimed at specific task/type/style of shoot and or related to a specific lens.



Is it aimed toward a lens your thinking of, as in like 100 mm F2.8 Macro IS or Non Is lens comparison?

Not specifically, it just got me thinking since the 100mm is the first lens I've owned that didn't have it. So I thought it would be a challenge but it isn't that hard without IS. So just wanted to see what everyone else's experiences were with or without IS, especially since the 24-70mm is so popular.

[Roosta]

Mate, Lance above makes a very valid point about long focal lengths and slow shutter speeds, on a long prime I would always have the IS if available. But if you ask on the Macro forum, you'll get mixed results. Long exposure and low/night shooting, you don't want it IMO.

I try to always stick to the rule of thumb on the focal length to shutter speed, 1/30 of a sec is the slowest speed that the human hand can hold a camera still enough to get a clear shot (Hand Held that is), but the 24-70 being F2.8 is a fast lens/glass and you can/should always use ISO and AP to get desired results, adjust shutter speed last of all. If you go here http://thedigitalpicture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-300mm-f-2.8-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx and mouse over the 'IS on - IS off' section.

[Fedgrub]

Excellent, great link. Thanks for the info, Roosta!

[98kellrs]

I've never, ever needed IS on the 24-70mm. Even in low light it just isn't neccessary unless you've got some serious hand shakes, especially if you utilise the full f2.8.

IS is however very useful on my 120-400mm Sigma, which I tend to shoot handheld, despite having a monopod.

[Roosta]

Excellent, great link. Thanks for the info, Roosta!

Too easy,

Suck what you can from his site, very helpful. He'll answer more direct emails as well if you need more direct advice on something he's written about.

[Bennymiata]

As far a s macro lenses go, if you're using it on a tripod, certainly there is no need for IS, but if you are chasing bugs, it does help.

My Sigma 150mm has OS and I find it very useful when chasing moving insects.

At anything around 100mm or more, if ther eis a choice between a lens with IS or without, I'll take the one with IS everytime, even if it does cost more.
Almost like choosing between a lens with AF and one without.
You may not need AF all the time, but it sure comes in handy when you do need it.

[Wayne]

Try handholding a D3 + 400/2.8VR + 2xTC. Essentially for anything more than a brief second on a still subject, looking through the viewfinder it is very hard to keep a single focus point on the subject in one spot. On a moving target, even harder, so for long focal length, low shutter speed/low light, I find it is very important when hand holding or using a mono.

[Arg]

I love it. I try to keep on or below ISO400 so it comes in very handy.

If you shoot on Program mode the camera automatically sets shutter speed fast enough not to need IS, so you would find yourself wondering why it is there, but if you shoot on M or T you can really give it a workout.

I especially like the way the viewfinder image stops wiggling when I touch the shutter button!

[William W]

Selecting Program Mode is NOT the saviour for camera shake and does NOT imply that IS should be deactivated.

When the Camera (Nikon - I believe; and Canon - certainly), is set to Program Mode, because the P Mode is (usually) biased towards a faster shutter speed, the Camera attempts to make the shutter speed acceptable to alleviate camera shake when hand holding: but it will not always succeed.

Other factors influencing the Shutter Speed Selection when the Camera is in P Mode are: the maximum aperture of the lens; and also the EV of the scene; and in some cases the ISO chosen, if there is not an Auto ISO function and/or if that is not selected; if a Flash is detected; and also the steadiness of the Photographer will determine if the shutter speed will arrest shake. There is (usually) a chart showing the graph of the functionality of Program Mode, in the Camera's Handbook and usually that chart takes a 50mm lens as typical, but all lenses are not 50mm and for other focal lengths field testing is required/suggested to firstly assess if FL data is factored into the algorithm – unless there are comprehensive charts, which have so far eluded.

Program Mode appears to be the most misunderstood and misrepresented of the three modern Automatic Camera Modes, being: Av Tv and P: and it also appears to be the least used and least utilized.



WW

[Arg]

For the benefit of WW, I will correct the fine detail of my previous post, thusly:

"If you shoot on Canon Program mode the camera automatically tries to set shutter speed fast enough not to need IS, so you would often find yourself wondering why it is there,...."


And some camera experts advise that using IS at fast shutter speeds can actually have a negative effect on sharpness, so if you accept this advice then using a lens with IS requires some vigilance:

is the shutter speed too slow? - use a tripod and turn IS off;
is the shutter speed too fast? - turn IS off;
is the shutter speed just right Goldilocks? - leave IS turned on.



My point that I love IS still stands. Not sure what WW's advice is to the OP on the need for IS when choosing a lens (post #1) though....

[William W]

Advice to the OP regarding IS and lenses and answering the general question posted in #1: was to not assume that IS is NOT needed, when using P Mode. That was clearly stated in the first sentence.


The added information apropos the functionality of P Mode, was for general interest and to promote better understanding of P Mode.

As there was misunderstanding of P Mode posted above, the added information was specifically for the interest and assistance of that author: nothing more, nothing less.

"Forum" is where we discuss and share information - no?

WW


PS - I sought none: nor do I gain any benefit from the corrections of details in previous posts, but thank you anyway, but it was un-necessary.

[William]

Probably get my head bitten off for this , But I don't think it's (IS/OS) that important if you use a high enough shutter speed , Maybe if you have the shakes bad and are'nt holding the camera and breathing the correct way it will benefit , Back in the old days we did'nt have such luxuries , But I'm old school and that is my opinion, I've been using a Sigma 120-400 DG lately and have the OS (On Sigma) Switched off , Hey, I works for me :)

[JM Tran]

"Forum" is where we discuss and share information - no?

It is also for sharing and discussing photos as well, not purely technical details.

[William W]

Your meaning?
As no particular topic was mentioned for exclusive discussion and sharing.

WW

[JM Tran]

Your meaning?
As no particular topic was mentioned for exclusive discussion and sharing.

WW


quite obvious, meaning the majority of your posts tend to focus on very technical aspects of photography. We on AP would like to see more of your photos shared on here and not exclusively about 'arresting motion' of a lens or whatnot. You know what they say, knowledge only goes so far without photos to back it up.

[William W]

Thank you for answering.
Yes, it appeared obvious in meaning.
But it was best to draw out exactly what the meaning was and not leave it veiled in quips and what could be interpreted as sardonic innuendo.

***

One chooses to post information on the topics of one's choosing making comment which one assumes will be useful or of assistance to others.
However others can take the comments on board or ignore them.
When necessary, suitable images have been posted to assist the understanding and meaning of the text.

***
It occurs to me as strange, that there would be such a strong linkage between knowledge, experience and the provision of comments and the posting a few photos.
Both knowledege and experience are often expressed in words only, written and spoken.

Moreover, it occurs to me as more strange that one needs post more images, than have already been posted, to be deemed worthwhile as a commentator.

Also, the deeming (or not) of being worthwhile as a commentator by a Grand Poobah apparently representing the “we here”, can also be taken on board or ignored and might or might not be of concern, anyway.

And, that expression of "what they say about how far knowledg goes" had not been cited before: is it an original of yours?

WW

[bricat]

I do find the discussions by "William W" and others to be interesting and knowledgeable. I enjoy reading them even though they are way above my capacity at this stage but it does allow me to "be inspired" to learn a bit more.

[ricktas]

IS/OS/VR has only been available for the past 10 years or so, prior to that, the last 180 odd years of photography did not have IS/OS/VR, and some of the best photos ever taken, were taken in that period.

Can it be handy, yes, is it necessary, NO.

[JM Tran]

Thank you for answering.
Yes, it appeared obvious in meaning.
But it was best to draw out exactly what the meaning was and not leave it veiled in quips and what could be interpreted as sardonic innuendo.

***

One chooses to post information on the topics of one's choosing making comment which one assumes will be useful or of assistance to others.
However others can take the comments on board or ignore them.
When necessary, suitable images have been posted to assist the understanding and meaning of the text.

***
It occurs to me as strange, that there would be such a strong linkage between knowledge, experience and the provision of comments and the posting a few photos.
Both knowledege and experience are often expressed in words only, written and spoken.

Moreover, it occurs to me as more strange that one needs post more images, than have already been posted, to be deemed worthwhile as a commentator.

Also, the deeming (or not) of being worthwhile as a commentator by a Grand Poobah apparently representing the “we here”, can also be taken on board or ignored and might or might not be of concern, anyway.

And, that expression of "what they say about how far knowledg goes" had not been cited before: is it an original of yours?

WW


You know what they say in life right, do you talk the talk as well as you walk the walk? Being a photography forum, images is what really reinforces a good photographer, not what they know for technical knowledge as that is only a part of it, because really - a photograph is the end product. In reality, many people tend to respect those that can back up what they say by their photo samples. There has been a few of the 'technically superior' people on AP in the past, come and go:)

I'd just thought I'd correct you on that simple comment earlier thats all, since you also like to point out little details that others post too.


And, that expression of "what they say about how far knowledg goes" had not been cited before: is it an original of yours?

ahhh yes the classic fall back to pointing out someone's grammar when written hurriedly on an Ipad, welcome to the Intermanet! I and others are looking forward to seeing more of your photos, as your knowledge and experience will make for some very interesting viewing:)

[ricktas]

Must say, I agree with our Grand Poobah here. I tend to take the advice of those that have shown they have a skill behind the camera (by posting photos of high quality), over those who do not post photos. After all, I could sit here and rabbit on about haedstrom reamers for ages, but that does not mean I can do a decent root canal if you found you needed one.

I too, like JM, prefer to take my advice from someone who can show they can walk the walk, as well as talk the talk.

[kiwi]

since when was JM the grand poobah ?

I also started googling "haedstrom reamers" but the image search was quite disturbing

I still do not understand the reluctance of people with knowledge and quite likely skill to not post photos to lead by example. Oh well. :confused013

[ricktas]

since when was JM the grand poobah ?



Since he made it is custom user title,..just like you are "Is a NZ flightless bird "

[kiwi]

doh :xmas31::Doh:

[sunny6teen]

hedstrom reamers sound like they'd be experts at performing a decent root canal.

[William W]

Fellas, you are all way too fast for me.
Understood: you want to see some photos.
I have so done: it was a request when I first joined and I did so.
I had a few conversations with the Administration here about this and the same logic was given to me that I and my comments would be “better respected” if I posted more photos.
I just joined because I was asked to join and after joining, I just wanted to contribute, on or about the topic of the thread, politely and in good conversation without personal comments and remarks, for example about “the technically superior people coming and going”.

This thread is about IS. I have been reading it from the beginning and I felt I could not add much to what had already been provided: but I read it again a few days later and I noted it was mentioned that using P Mode, would alleviate the necessity to use IS: that is incorrect.
And in the interest of sharing more knowledge about IS and also more knowledge about P Mode . . . I simply did NOT say “that’s wrong” . . . but I also explained a little about the why and the how.

Is there a problem with that?
I have previously been told this is not a problem. Have the rules changed?
If this is not wrong for one to choose what threads to comment upon - then I shall continue to contribute on the topics which I choose to contribute, without reluctance for anything.
I might choose the more technical subjects – is that wrong so to do?
Then again I might choose to critique or to put some workup for critique or just to share a Christmas Photo

(http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?96454-Practicing-for-Christmas&p=956349#post956349)But I will I not worry about Mr Tran correcting me on meaning or be concerned that he thinks I am picking him up on his grammar or Ipod use – those comments I don't understand at all.



It seems to me this thread has turned a tad sour and is focusing to be about what someone chooses not to do: rather than what they choose to share.

Goodnight and Merry Christmas.



WW

[Mark L]

***
One chooses to post information on the topics of one's choosing making comment which one assumes will be useful or of assistance to others.
......
When necessary, suitable images have been posted to assist the understanding and meaning of the text.
***
FWIW
I've learned plenty from what WW has posted, and can remember images he's used to demonstrate his view.
These images were not posted in the CC forums. This seems to be the "engine room" of AP (for want of a better way of putting it).
I imagine if WW posted for CC it would be to show how a particular image was achieve so that some of us could learn. However his choice is " to post information on the topics of one's choosing making comment which one assumes will be useful or of assistance to others."
I see a place for this, as I've learned just as much from reading what people have to say as I have from viewing their photos. This is changing though as I get more confident in taking photos.
My 2c worth. And I ain't going to argue with any one about what their 2c worth is. :)
And I've also learned a bit about IS/OS/VR, thanks.