70-200 F2.8 IS or Non IS for shooting sports

[andyjonesphotography]

I'm about to switch over to Canon and get a EOS 1D MkII (N) for shooting

sports. My main lens will be a 70-200 f2.8, but I don't know enough about the

Canon lenses to make my decision between IS and non-IS versions. I shoot Ice

Hockey, Figure Skating, Soccer, etc.

 

Any help appreciated

 

Thanks

 

Andy

[yeux tortu]

IS will not freeze action of moving subjects. if you shoot more static subjects in addition to sports than I definately would go for it.

[stephen sullivan]

Go with the EF 70~200 2.8L IS

 

Why, because is has a Circular Apreture, where the Non-IS does not.

[doc_nickel]

You can turn off IS in a lens that has it, but you can't turn IS on in a lens that doesn't have it.

 

That assumes the additional cost isn't a significant issue, and one assumes it isn't, if you're already buying a $4K camera and a $1K+ lens to go with it.

 

I have one IS lens, the 28-300, and I love the system. There's places and times it can't be used, or used effectively, but it's helped more often than not.

 

Doc.

[catchlight]

<i>I shoot Ice Hockey, Figure Skating, Soccer, etc.</i><p>

As stated above, IS won't help you freeze action. <p>Also, light levels are very low in many rinks and other indoor sports venues. IMO, buy the non-IS zoom, and spend the $400 or so that you save on a fast prime, such as the Canon 85/1.8, to use when f/2.8 won't cut it.

[William Michael]

I was faced with exactly the same question last year.

 

Up Front I state I was equating VALUE and USAGE for MONEY expended.

 

I have a 20D and wanted to shoot (not for money) elite swimming, field hockey and Track and Field events.

 

I asked two friends who are still professionally shoot these sports and they both use the non IS versions.

 

The logic: under lights to freeze even breaststroke you need 1/320 shutter and for fly, back or free at least 1/500, field sports outside I can use 1/500 or faster: so even with the lens wound out to 200mm I figured I should be able to hold it steady - and I can.

 

The difference in cost I put toward the 50mm F1.4 and 85mm F1.8 for the avialble light "people" I like to do.

 

I take the point about the circular aperture, but that does not concern me personally.

 

But also you might consider (I understand) the IS version is better sealed from dust and wet etc?

 

I may regret my decision should I later decide to use the zoom in lower light for portraits et al, where fine ISO is necessary - but I don't shoot Weddings professionally any more.

 

I was faced with this photographic situation a few weeks ago as a guest at my niece's wedding; I used my legs and the 85mm F1.8 to shoot A.L.portraits in the Church at all around f5.6 @ 1/50.

 

Hope my slant helps in your choice.

 

Regards. WW

[William Michael]

Brent, beat me by a couple of minutes to my opinion!

[j.kivekas]

I've got the IS version. Both are extremely good. The Non-Is is optically marginally better. The IS may give you some advantage shooting in the dark, but like stated, it will not freeze the object. It does help when you are panning say a car, but probably not with an ice hockey player, helps occasionally with figure skaters (if gliding position static).<p>

The EF 85/1.8 is definitely worth the prize difference. The lense I'd like to have for indoor sports is the EF135/2 L. There is no substitute for aperture power.

[m_barbu1]

I think they key question you should ask yourself is whether or not it's probably that you will want to use the lens in a low light situation where you don't need a fast shutter speed (such as photographing in a church, to name one example out of many). If it is, it might be worth spending the money on the IS.

[leopoldstotch]

The IS lens will do very little for sports shooting. I use the non IS version at work for sports, and its great. Contrary to one of the comments above, even though it does not have a circular aperture, it still produces excellant bokeh.

[iori]

I do a lot of motorsports photography, and like to use slow shutter speeds (1/125 seconds and slower) to capture the sensation of speed while panning along with the vehicle. To capture those shots, I use my 70-200 2.8/IS with the IS in mode 2, which helps stabilize any vertical shaking. I'll try to post some recent images later, but the results are consistently fabulous. If you have the money, get the IS. You'll soon forget about the pain to the wallet, but you'll not soon get over the regret of not having a feature I view as essential for telephoto coverage beyond 125mm, especially when one uses this lens in combination with a 1.4x teleconverter.

[derek_simpson]

Motor sport panning benefits greatly from IS mode 2 as already mentioned - IS is also handy for set piece plays/kicks at the far end of the field - and trophy presentations when you are on the field and ceremony is in the stands or vice versa. There are often still shots in poor light involved with sport - it isn't all action when piecing together a story - For those moments and when you are tired at the end of a game IS is very useful.

[whwhitejr]

Andy, get the IS and don't look back, Bill