70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 4 end

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Monito wrote:
This is what Jim Colwell means by "do the math".

That's right Alan.

Although, it doesn't cover the near/far angular velocity thing. Actually, it's more like angular displacement over time, but nobody seems to care about the math. Just wait 'till we get into the physics...

P.S. Tim, this 'extra' stuff discussion must cover at least the added cost for IS. Have you thought about Extenders...?

Edited on Jan 20, 2013 at 08:41 PM · View previous versions

Jan 20, 2013 at 08:37 PM

Monito
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

jcolwell wrote: Although, it doesn't cover the near/far angular velocity thing. Actually, it's more like angular displacement over time, but who's doing the math...

Yes. As you know, near or far doesn't matter since the angular velocity on the sensor is the same and the net result is an effectively linear smear which can be usefully analyzed as a blur disk (circle of confusion) with the same parameters that affect depth of field (print size, degree of enlargement, visual acuity, viewing distance).

jcolwell wrote: Just wait 'till we get into the physics...

Physics is just a branch of mathematics.

Jan 20, 2013 at 08:41 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Monito wrote:
jcolwell wrote: Although, it doesn't cover the near/far angular velocity thing. Actually, it's more like angular displacement over time, but who's doing the math...

Yes. As you know, near or far doesn't matter since the angular velocity on the sensor is the same and the net result is an effectively linear smear which can be usefully analyzed as a blur disk (circle of confusion) with the same parameters that affect depth of field (print size, degree of enlargement, visual acuity, viewing distance).

Yes, but it does matter for the "shooting bunnies" from a moving train scenario - what a despicable thing to do.

Jan 20, 2013 at 08:43 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Monito wrote:
Physics is just a branch of mathematics.

Some say the opposite. Were's Whayne when you need him?*

* spartial poonerism intended

Jan 20, 2013 at 08:48 PM

Monito
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Chemistry is just a branch of physics.

Jan 20, 2013 at 08:56 PM

gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

rabbitmountain wrote:
Dan, I don't understand your reply. You basically repeated what I wrote in other words. Did you read my entire post at all?

You were absolutely correct on the concept relating crop factor to shutter speed, I just wanted to reiterate that there is nothing sacred about the "rule of thumb" suggesting that 1/focal length.

Take care,

Dan

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:01 PM

gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

jcolwell wrote:
Monito wrote:
Physics is just a branch of mathematics.

Some say the opposite. Were's Whayne when you need him?*

* spartial poonerism intended

Guy et it.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:02 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #8 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Monito wrote:
Chemistry is just a branch of physics.

No problem here. How about bio?

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:03 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #9 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

gdanmitchell wrote:
jcolwell wrote:
Monito wrote:
Physics is just a branch of mathematics.

Some say the opposite. Were's Whayne when you need him?*

* spartial poonerism intended

Guy et it.

Alright, yow nou're wessing mith by mrain. Detting gizzy!

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:07 PM

Monito
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Monito wrote: Chemistry is just a branch of physics.

jcolwell wrote: No problem here. How about bio?

Biography is just a branch of fiction.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:08 PM

jtmiv
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

jcolwell wrote:
Monito wrote:
This is what Jim Colwell means by "do the math".

That's right Alan.

P.S. Tim, this 'extra' stuff discussion must cover at least the added cost for IS. Have you thought about Extenders...?

Dear jcolwell,

No I hadn't thought about extenders but I do own a calculator just in case my mental math skills can't keep up with FL x 1.6 x 1.4, or x 2.

I'm just a guy that would like to get a lens that lets me take the mental image I witnessed home with me on a data card for later review and possible sharing with friends and relatives.

I've pretty much decided based on what I read here that IS will have a real value to me as much of the time I will be using the lens will be on the early or later ends of the day and getting all the potentially available light gathered might need some assistance?

I've also decided that I will probably purchase a used lens. My girlfriend's impending car trouble has convinced me that my tax refund might not be as generous as I previously assumed?

Carry on as you see fit!

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:21 PM

RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Havnt read the thread but my thoughts...

Canon 20d is only 8mp so 1/focal length should be fine for shutter speeds.
Its also poor at high ISO, 800 is about all I would push it too.

If you shoot in Good light then the f4 non IS will be fine
If you shoot in anything less and the subject doesnt move get the IS version
If the subject moves get a 2.8 or IMO a modern body which will give you 3 stops of 'light' via ISO.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:26 PM

Monito
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

RobDickinson wrote:
Havnt read the thread but my thoughts...

Canon 20d is only 8mp so 1/focal length should be fine for shutter speeds.

Generally, embarrassment can be avoided by reading threads before replying.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:31 PM

RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

No need to get embarrassed Monito!

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:34 PM

Monito
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

RobDickinson wrote:
No need to get embarrassed Monito!

Not me. Too late for you. Your mention of the pixel density of the 20D has been debunked already, as has the usefulness of the 1/focal-length guideline, which is almost useless.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:36 PM

RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

Only speaking from experience not math....

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:37 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #17 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

jtmiv wrote:
...I've also decided that I will probably purchase a used lens.

Go for it Tim!

P.S. you can get some data on contemporary used lens prices at my Lens Price Database, Lens$db, http://tinyurl.com/jcolwell-lensdb

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:39 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #18 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

RobDickinson wrote:
Only speaking from experience not math....

Getting the math right implies that you have the physics (chemistry and/or biography) right. It also implies that you understand what's really going on - optically speaking. Physcology isn't well-described by the 'physical sciences'. OTOH, physcology is what makes us what we are; subject to the physics, of course.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:42 PM

Monito
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

RobDickinson wrote:
Only speaking from experience not math....

Spare us. Read the thread.

The math trumps experience since it is clear, but the factors that can be plugged in vary. One person's experience with regard to camera shake and the print size they print at and the way their prints are viewed have little meaning without understanding the math involved because other people print other sizes for other purposes. Finally, much depends on an individual's motor neurons and physiology and caffeine.

Spare yourself any further embarrassment and read the thread.

Edited on Jan 20, 2013 at 09:45 PM · View previous versions

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:43 PM

RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · 70-200f4L, is IS worth an additional $ 500.00?

jcolwell wrote:
RobDickinson wrote:
Only speaking from experience not math....

Getting the math right implies that you have the physics (chemistry and/or biography) right. It also implies that you understand what's really going on - optically speaking. Physcology isn't well-described by the 'physical sciences'. OTOH, physcology is what makes us what we are; subject to the physics, of course.

I'm all for science but the 1/focal length rule has always been a rule of thumb subject to many variances and a staring point rather than and end point.

Jan 20, 2013 at 09:44 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end