Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 8, 2005, 9:30 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
killdeer0007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,328
Default

I have decided to get the new Canon Digital XT with the kit lens. When I get better at using it, I will buy a second lens. I've looked at Sigma and Tamron but keep getting drawn back to the Canon because of image stabilization. I'm thinking of a zoom up to 200. Do I need stabilization for that? I don't really want to carry a tripod hiking or biking.

Thanks

//jim
killdeer0007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 8, 2005, 11:35 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 544
Default

Whether you "need" image stabilization or not is entirely up to you. Canon isn't alone in making stabilized lenses. Sigma has "OS" (Optical Stabilization) available in some of its lenses. IS adds weight and cost to a lens. Here's an example:

Canon EF-70-200 f/4 $550

Canon EF-70-200 f/2.8 $950 (approx) Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 $750 (approx)

Canon EF-70-200 f/2.8 IS $1500 (approx)

Shooting hand held you'll gain a couple of stops with the IS lens. I regularly shoot hand held down to about 1/15 sec with my EF-S 17-85IS lens on my 20D in poor light at ISO 1600.
Wildman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 2:52 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Mr_Saginaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 552
Default

Hey, NHL... you're just waiting for me to say it... aren't you? :lol:
Mr_Saginaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 9:17 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

Mr_Saginaw wrote:
Quote:
Hey, NHL... you're just waiting for me to say it... aren't you? :lol:
:G - was traveling cross country for business... (and slow dial-up)

1. IMO if anyone really want IS they should buy a camera with the 'stabilization' built-into the camera like the Minolta's 7D - This will work with any lenses (and probably more cost effective!)

2. An IS 'teleconverter' that can work with any lens is also a good idea - somebody should make one...

3. One more point: IS only does wonder on static object, when things move all bets are off :?
When I don't have a stand for night scenes (things that don't move) I use the timer and rest my camera on a flat surface... :O
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2005, 6:06 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Mr_Saginaw wrote:
Quote:
Hey, NHL... you're just waiting for me to say it... aren't you? :lol:
Go on then - you know you want to...
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2005, 7:32 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

I finally did it: :blah:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...181&forum_id=2

Instead of spending on IS - a faster lens benefit is real (with a larger aperture):
1 - Better bokeh
2 - Faster shutter speed over IS on compact zoom
3 - Constant aperture lenses are almost always better designed
4 - @ f/2.8 some cameras allow a more precise focus!

About the only negative is their massive size - but then that's where the extra cost went! :-)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2005, 7:52 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Mr_Saginaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 552
Default


and last but not least... IS is for sissys... :blah:


ok... i got it out of my system... i'm been hold that one in for at least a day... :lol:
Mr_Saginaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2005, 10:03 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

i don't think so.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2005, 4:17 PM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

So Mr_Saginaw are you going to tell sjms about your 'macho' lens??? :-) :lol: :-)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 9, 2005, 4:49 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

http://www.pbase.com/crusader/image/23291403

this was taken 2 years ago with the following gear

EOS1Ds handheld distance approx75 yds at 280mm

70-200 f2.8L IS USM with a 1.4x extender II

this is a crop of the original and is only 30% of it.

now if you would like i can find the shot again and crop down to the first girls left shoe so you can read what style of shoe (on the tongue) is named as they run. fairly tough to do when is blurred while tracking (you know she's moving i'm moving and yes it is a fairly heavy rig and then theres the distance too)
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:54 PM.