IS lenses are great. I own a Canon 70-300 IS and when I decided I wanted to go a little longer I opted for the 300mm 2.8L with a 1.4 TC over the 400mm 5.6L just because of the IS.
Please comment briefly on your experience with image stabilized lenses/cameras.
- Log in or register to post comments
I would love to have IS on my camera sensor. It would keep the cost and weight of my lenses down (and I wouldn't have to replace the ones I have) and allow a couple of stops latitude. Especially useful in lower light or when using zoom.
I have used it in a Point and Shoot and one of my lenses that I recently sold. It is great and really helps in difficult situation (lowlight, windy evenings at sports events, etc.). I would like to buy the nicer Canon lenses with IS, as I have friends who think that they are absolutely fantastic.
It takes discipline to use it properly. You can't just keep it turned on. It works against you in panning shots. So you have to remember to turn it off. I just picked up a Canon L series lens that has a panning IS mode. It's great, but something else you have to remember to switch.
While I do see some improvement with image stabilization, it's really not as much improvement as claimed and it's very unpredictable when it works well. It certainly doesn't replace a tripod and it certainly doesn't influence my camera and lens purchases very much.
IS is not perfect, but it usually allows me to hand hold, when I need to, for an extra couple of stops. I find it is best with shorter focal lengths, but that is expected. Why is IS important? Because even with improving processors, image quality degrades with higher ISO settings. I want to keep ISO as low as possible.