StillFingerz wrote:
One question, reviews state that these new wides; 24/28/35, have Canon's newer IS; not the hybrid of the 100L, does this mean that these new lenses are tripod sensing like many of the newer zooms and teles are?
Jerry, "Hybrid IS" compensates for both angle camera shake and shift camera shake. This is not related to tripod auto-detecting. From their manuals, IS should be turned off when tripod mounted.
Now, it seems like the 24mm f/2.8 IS and 28mm f/2.8 IS do not have a Hybrid IS system.
How about the 35mm? Many sites are describing the 35mm f/2 IS having Hybrid IS. Canon does not seem to use 'Hybrid' when describing its IS system but did write: "It can detect normal shooting or panning, and automatically switches to the optimal IS mode"...so perhaps the 35mm f/2 IS is equipped with a "smarter" not "hybrid" IS system when comparing it to the 24 and 28mm IS.
Michaelparris wrote:
With the exception being maybe for video....just curious
Does one need Live View?
Just as the opinion about LV evolved from a "gimmick" to "must have", you will find the same to happen with IS on the wide angle. It's not that the 24-70 is a long lens, yet the uproar about it not having IS was certainly noticeable, if I recall...
It's handy sometimes. I liked having stabilization with all my lenses when I was using a KonicaMinolta 7D camera. A few times it gave me the shots otherwise very difficult to obtain - like when I was shooting a dimly lit disaster site once. I had usably sharp (not pin sharp, but usable) shots at 1/4 sec with ISO 3200 (maximum available) f/3.5 (wide open) 17mm focal length (Sigma 15-30/3.5-4.5 lens), and likewise sharp shots at 1/10 sec at f/2.4 50mm (Minolta 50/1.7 lens), same ISO. A few made it to the print and agency. So points to Nikon for releasing the 16-35/4 VR lens and to Sony for their 10-18/4 OSS lens for the NEX. And of course to all those companies that make cameras with built-in stabilization.
When I went to Canon 6 years ago, I got the 17-55/2.8 IS and loved it dearly (it was the reason I chose Canon and not Nikon - the latter's 17-55 had no stabilization). Unfortunately, my love was pretty much unrequited.
The majority of my pictures are taken inside museums. Tripods typically aren't allowed, pretty often flash is forbidden too. Subjects are, of course, totally static. In such conditions IS is very, very handy.
The scenario above is pretty similar to the churches other already mentioned.
That's the reason why I am going to get the 35mm f/2 IS instead of a f/1.4. In my case the IS is more valuable than an extra stop.
Back to the OP question, the answer may be "no" for a large amount of people, but a very strong "yes" for others (indeed a minority)
I'm pretty sure this thread is filled with different opinions, however the fact of the matter is that it really depends on the shooter and the shooting situation. In a wide angle lens I personally would prefer to have it as it adds more flexibility for the shooter, however I can live without it for the most part, especially as I go wider.
24/28/35, have Canon's newer IS; not the hybrid of the 100L, does this mean that these new lenses are tripod sensing like many of the newer zooms and teles are?
See page 4 of this link, look under tripod column:
boingyman wrote:
I'm pretty sure this thread is filled with different opinions, however the fact of the matter is that it really depends on the shooter and the shooting situation. In a wide angle lens I personally would prefer to have it as it adds more flexibility for the shooter, however I can live without it for the most part, especially as I go wider.
Although I favor IS in WA (and all lenses, really!), I agree with the opinions posted here that IS is most valuable for lenses 100mm and over when hand held.
The novelty is that we are only now getting IS in prime lenses below 100mm. Previously it's only been in WA zooms.
The novelty is that we are only now getting IS in prime lenses below 100mm. Previously it's only been in WA zooms.
Canon is finally understanding that photographers do not like to be FORCED to buy a Canon zoom, in shorter focal lengths, to get IS. Prior to the 100mm f2.8L IS macro in 2009, the cheapest Canon prime lens, shorter than 299mm with IS, was the $6,000 200mm f2L!
I find it interesting that IS is sometimes considered unnessary and gimmicky, but f/1.4 isn't. I think f/1.4 is just as overused and cheesy as HDR--same issue, makes boring photos look superficially interesting, but gets old fast if the photo doesn't have something else going for it.
I think IS in ANY focal lens is helpful.....thats just me though. People say why don't the Canon 10-22mm don't need IS, but just think if you had 4-5 stops and at 10mm you could take what 1/2 second shots (i didn't know the exact math), that would be awesome and you woudln't need a tripod at night almost. I"m sure we will get their.
I like having IS on my 17-55 as it means I don't need to carry a tripod around with me when light is going to be relatively low. That may seem lazy to some photographers but it has meant that I have gotten shots that I would never had before as I hate carrying a tripod!
<-- In fact, my avatar is a good example of such a shot!
Would be a plus in situations like taking dramatic close up of a bear in Alaska while running like hell backwards to get that one final great WA shot of the gaping jaws. Your heirs will thank you for spending the extra $$ for the IS when they sell that shot to Getty.
A line one rendered 1px wide in an image w/o IS might blur 10px wide in a tele but only 1-2px with WA and not be noticed due to the other factors like the AA filter, lens resolution, etc.
Not something I'd trade up for. Just take a deep breath. Now exhale part way and hold. Now put that credit card back in the wallet.... Feel better?
eosfun wrote:
Our member Jae (member FlyPenFly) has shown several great handheld cityscapes by night, though these were (mostly) shot with m43 OM-D camera with IBIS instead of optical IS the effect is practically the same.
Thanks, if you're referring to this shot, it was actually with a Nex-C3 using every trick in the book to get handheld. One of the photos I've sold to be printed very large for an installation.
