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

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 14, 2006, 8:21 AM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 17

IS Lens and Rebel XT Compatibility

Hi Guys..

I was gong to buy the Rebel XT (350D) with the Canon 17-85mm EF-S IS USM Lens.

But the Sales person told me that the IS lens is not compatible with the XT.

He said the lens would work fine but the Image stabilization will not work with the XT.

For the IS in this lens to work I would have to look at a different Canon Camera.

Please keep in mind that I was ready to buy the unit, the sales person just told what he had learn from the canon representative that came to train him. He did not try to sell me any thing else, he told to do some more research before I spend my Cash.

Now I am worried …. I sent Canon a email but they have not responded yet. On their website it says the lens is compatible with the XT.

I don't want pay for a feature that I cannot use.

Please help..
kamla is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 14, 2006, 9:59 AM   #2
Senior Member
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339

don't deal with that guy, anymore. He should do his own research

all EF and EF-S lenses will work for the XT... and they'll work to their fullest potential, including the IS feature

IS is IN the lens... it has a life of its own and is not controlled by the camera bodies...
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2006, 10:08 AM   #3
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 17


Canon said the same thing...

will this lens be good in low light pics...

like when i take pics indoor at night,, @ paties ans such...
kamla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2006, 1:24 AM   #4
Senior Member
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339

Well, it depends how what you consider as low light and what you're taking a picture of.

lighting conditions indoors can vary, from a dim bar to a very bright hospital. If you're taking pictures of stationary objects, you might be able to pull it off with the 17-85 in dim conditions. You'll probably have to use smaller focal lengths so you can use lower shutter speeds.

The general rule for the handheld min shutter speed is 1/focal length
IE at 85mm on the xt (equiv to 136mm after 1.6x crop), you'd normally need a shutter speed of 1/160 - or you could possibly pull it off with 1/125, depending on how stable you can hold the camera.

now zoom out to 30mm, the equiv on the xt is 48mm , so your min shutter speed requirement becomes 1/50 - a reasonable requirement in low light situations.

Real trouble comes with moving subjects. Even if you compensate by slowing down the shutter speed, there are higher chances of subjects blurring. Even at 1/60s, the object can blur if there was moderate movement (i.e. waving a hand)- but I usually found 1/60 to be sufficient. The advantage IS has, as opposed to using a larger aperture to increase shutter time, is when you want to take group shots, or other situations where a large DOF is necessary. Even if you can handle a dim condition by using f/1.4, the DOF is only 2cm if you're using the XT with the sigma 30mm and the subject is 1m away.

Not to mention the fact that you're indoors, so distances between you and your subject can be really small.

So in the end could an IS system pull off some low light conditions? I would think so (in theory, it should). But sometimes even I have trouble with my sigma 30mm f/1.4 , so I don't expect the 17-85 to do better. Just don't be surprised if you find IS choking in extreme situations like a bar.
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2006, 2:43 AM   #5
Super Moderator
peripatetic's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599

In my experience, for static subjects the IS is worth exactly what it says it is, 3 stops of hand-hold-ability.

At 85mm I can get sharp shots at 1/30 where I would otherwise look to 1/250.

At 17mm I can get sharp shots down to around 1/6. That's pretty useful. However in general I find IS to be less useful at shorter focal lengths because I don't really take a lot of low-light shots of static objects.

IS is indispensible on a long lens IMO, but on a short one I could live without it and would swap for a wider maximum aperture without doubt.

Returning to the original question however, I would strongly recommend the 17-85 as the best walkaround lens to go with the XT, and the IS will most certainly work with it.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2006, 6:30 AM   #6
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529

One other thing to add to low light photography issues:

autofocus. You will find that lenses with a wider maximum aperture will often have a better ability to focus in low light - which makes sense because they let in more light. So, without AF-assist from a flash, you may find some issues with focus in low light. But, to be honest if lighting is that dim you should be using a flash or very bright prime (1.8 or 1.4) anyway.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 17, 2006, 12:04 PM   #7
Junior Member
rlepik's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 28

I'd take the replies from Canon & various people to the store manager. This salesguy is loosing a lot of customers & God knows what other misinformation he's handing out.

I have same lens-camera combo & it works perfectly.
rlepik is offline   Reply With Quote

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 5:31 PM.