Please comment briefly on your experience with IS lenses and whether they have proven to be beneficial to your work.

Editor's picture
With virtually every lens maker--camera brand maker and independent--now offering image stabilization models, how important is that feature to you when you considering your next lens purchase?
Please comment briefly on your experience with IS lenses and whether they have proven to be beneficial to your work.
Very important and I would make a purchasing decision based on the lens having this feature.
64% (74 votes)
Not important. I prefer getting a lens with a faster maximum aperture at all focal lengths.
25% (29 votes)
Does not apply because I have IS built into the camera body I own.
11% (13 votes)
Total votes: 116
Share | |
Comments
Al Gonzalez's picture

Most of my photography done where hand-held shots are the only option, often in low light environments. IS makes a difference.

John J.  Trautner's picture

Absolutely essential for a wildlife photographer. From a safety standpoint being able to distance yourself from the subject allows for a much better photo and reduces or eliminates stress for the wildlife.

DKS's picture

VR has proven to be a huge benefit to me on long lenses for wildlife photography. However, for macro work it hasn't been that helpful.

L.  M.  Greer's picture

I've just started getting IS lens. They seem to help with long lens and camera shake. I shoot my grandaughter's softball games. I've found that with the IS lens most of the shots are sharper. Sometimes I'm at a shutter speed fast enough to stop the action, but to slow to prevent the camera shake. This is where the IS feature has helped me.

Robert Hooper's picture

I find IS lenses slow up my shooting and do not produce sharp results consistently. Sharpness is hit and miss in my experience.

C.  J.  Elfont's picture

For long focal lengths and zooms, I prefer this. On my shorter lenses it is not that important to me as I am still pretty steady - if the lens I want has IS I would probably opt for the xtra bucks.

Brock's picture

The higher magnification, the more important. I have no IS built into my cameras.

Jack Bynes's picture

As I get older I find that my hand held shots at 1/60th sec. are not as sharp as I would like. IS has solved that problem for me.

Russell's picture

I wouldn't go back to non-IS lens any more than I would go without auto-focus.

Carl Parker's picture

I use a Nikon D700 along with most of Nikon's IS lenses. I find they are great for fast action photography, and very essential in low light situations in which I cannot use a tripod or monopod.

Keith Corwin's picture

You can't always shoot with a large aperture.

George Edwards's picture

Olympus IS very effective especially for scenic shots in the back 40 where setting up a tripod is difficult & never possible in the right place.

Michael Gluckman's picture

They really do work!

Tom Judd's picture

Critical for my Canon 5D. Not needed for my MFT Olympus PEN.

Al Neauman's picture

VR/IR is a wonderful new tool. It is not absolutely necessary, and if you think about it, how did we all manage for so many years without it? When attached to one of my long lenses, I can use a tripod, and, if I don't have one, I have never been in a situation where there was not something I couldn't use as a brace base. Who hasn't used a shoulder of a friend? Is VR/IR important? I suppose it is one of the next steps in the evolution of our equipment, but there are so many beautiful and wonderfully designed lenses out there for half the price without VR/IR.

Dave Bargabus's picture

The IS feature really helps me as I am handicapped and have a balance and stability problems.

Jim Osborn's picture

As a nature photographer, one who often works in low light conditions and with moving objects, I find IS to be invaluable. I have it on most of my lenses and use it much of the time when I am in the field. I should add that I do a lot of handheld photography. Trying to use a tripod with wildlife often if not a viable option.

Allen's picture

For longer focal length lens IS is very important to me. Shorter focal length zooms or fixed, IS is not that important. At my age anything that helps me get a sharp image is important.

Richard MacCallum's picture

Invaluable to me. I take most shots hand held. The rest goes without saying.

Charlie Ednie's picture

I'm able to hand hold shots that were not possible for me previously. IS is something that I would look for in any future lens purchase.

Dennis Leser's picture

I have a medical condition called essential tremors where it is difficult to hold the camera steady.

Robert LeHew's picture

99% of my work is done using a tripod so the extra expense of IS makes no sense for me.

Arthur J.  Saffir's picture

IS adds enormously to value of my photographic equipment. My AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm together with my Nikon D700 make shots routine that otherwise would be completely impossible.

Ron D.'s picture

I prefer to have a fast prime, this is more appropriate for my style of shooting.

Tom Winsemius's picture

I find IS useful with P&S cameras because of the light weight. I rarely ever find that my camera stability is an issue with a full-sized camera and lens. IS is not a feature that I shop for.

Susan R.'s picture

I shoot a lot of low light with fast moving subjects. I really need IS.

Al Currie's picture

Have Canon lenses with IS that yield impressive results. Some are f 2.8 others are telephoto. Gives me freedom to shoot in "impossible" situations.

Richard Rickard's picture

As a person, up in age. A image stabilizer is very helpful in taking a picture.

Kevin L.'s picture

It is important to me to have the IS feature, but it would not be the sole deciding feature for buying a lens.

Angela A.  Stanton's picture

I love the IS feature--Canon does not have it built into the lens and I own Canon. It is a definite consideration.