fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Forum & Miscellaneous | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2007 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture

  
 
vijay venkat
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture


For poorly lit handheld indoor shots which is better - having only a larger aperture or having only optical stabilization. I am considering the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 vs. the Sigma 80-400 OS F/4-5.6. Price and zoom range are not considerations.




Dec 17, 2007 at 08:49 AM
paulhodson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture


IS should give you more than the one stop differences in aperture so from a camera shake point of view the IS is better.

But

focussing would be better with the 2.8 and a higher shitter speed stops action bettrer

horses for courses!

However if price is not a consideration - go for the Canon 70-200 IS - or even the 70-200 f/4.0 IS



Dec 17, 2007 at 11:10 AM
claudermilk
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture


paulhodson wrote:
focussing would be better with the 2.8 and a higher shitter speed stops action bettrer


well...I don't know about that, but wider aperture gives a faster SHUTTER speed, which stops action.

Personally, I prefer aperture over IS, but YMMV. Best is getting both (f2.8 + IS).



Dec 17, 2007 at 02:04 PM
paulhodson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture


Damn - I thought you were querying better focussing with a larger aperture lens and wrote a 4 page thesis in reply - then noticed my original typo


Dec 17, 2007 at 02:10 PM
vijay venkat
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture


claudermilk wrote:
Personally, I prefer aperture over IS, but YMMV. Best is getting both (f2.8 + IS).


If only everything were so simple. Sigh. One funky option seems to be using the f2.8 and external gyro. But I can't find any compact widely used gyro. Alternatively a pentax/olympus camera with in-body stabilization and the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 should probably help.



Dec 18, 2007 at 09:03 AM
Forrest Egan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture



External stabilization can get pretty expensive..
http://www.ken-lab.com/html/pricing.html

Still want to go that route?



Dec 18, 2007 at 09:21 AM
claudermilk
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · optical stabilization vs. large aperture


vijay venkat wrote:
If only everything were so simple. Sigh. One funky option seems to be using the f2.8 and external gyro. But I can't find any compact widely used gyro. Alternatively a pentax/olympus camera with in-body stabilization and the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 should probably help.


IMHO in this case it ought to be that simple. For stopping action in low light, f2.8 > f5.6+IS. Remember, photographers did just fine for years before Canon & Nikon introduced stabilization technology (ok, Sony started it with their camcorders).



Dec 18, 2007 at 12:43 PM





FM Forums | Forum & Miscellaneous | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account