How often do you use IS?

[rixhobbbies]

For those of you with IS lenses, how often do you use the feature? Do you

find that you keep it on all the time, or do you leave it off until your

situation needs it? Do you use it at wide focal lengths where the impact of

camera shake is less noticable?

 

I've heard some talk that IS can negatively impact sharpness if used when not

needed. I've also heard that Canon IS is the only IS that can be used while

on a tripod.

 

I'm just curious what some of you may have to be true regarding the Canon line.

 

Regards,

 

Rick

[sheryl_bury_michals]

Rick,

 

I've owned a 100-400 IS USM since April 2000, and the only time I use the IS feature is if my tripod is busted, or I just don't have a tripod at the time (if I forgot to bring it, for example). Then the IS comes in handy - especially when shooting rugby matches.

 

sheryl

[sgpix]

I have 70-200 2.8 IS and 24-105 4 IS... I leave IS on unless there is a reason to switch it off (not often)!

[mohammed_abidally]

Hi

 

I have been using a 100-400L IS USM lens for about a year now and am quite confused about the use of the IS. I find that some of my best (sharpest) shots have been hand held with the IS on. I would have expected the tripod shots with or without IS to be better, but they don't seem to match the best hand held shots. When on a tripod the non IS seems better but not quite totally conviced yet.

Regards,

Mohammed

[mars c]

I dont think IS has negative impact on sharpness, at least thats what I observed in my lens.

 

I leave IS on all the time , except when I'm using tripod with longer than 1/4 sec. exposure time.

[pjmeade]

As a rule I handhold, so I keep IS on all the time. That said, I like to keep shutter speeds fairly high, so it's probably not absolutely vital. But it's nice to know it's there.

[JeffOwen]

For my two IS lenses 17-85 and 70-300 I leave on all the time even at the wide end unless I use a tripod which is rare.

[jcolwell]

My 70-200/2.8 L IS is equally sharp with IS on for handheld shooting as with IS off for tripod shooting. My 300/4 L IS is slightly sharper with IS off on a tripod than with IS on for handheld shooting, but in most cases for daylight shooting it's plenty sharp handheld even with a 1.4x extender. I almost always use both of them handheld with IS on.

[Doug Obert]

With my 70-300 it is on all the time, hand held. On "sometimes" with a tripod.

[lester_wareham]

I have two IS lenses, the 300 f4 IS and the 24-105 f4 IS. I turn the 300mm off on tripod because this older IS unit is known to be unstable in that condition. The more modern zoom IS unit should detect it is 'on tripod', I found it seems to be fine for tripod use.

 

An additional note that with the 300mm I found Mode 2 IS was about a stop better than Mode 1 IS on a monopod but handheld it did not make much difference.

 

I have some tests of IS performance here.

http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/IS_Tests/index.htm

[steve santikarn]

I leave my IS on all of my lenses (17-85, 17-55, 100-400, 75-300, 70-300) switched on almost the time. I don't even think about it most of the time.

[lheusinkveld]

On, all the time. I either handhold or use a monopod. When I got my first IS lens (28-135) I noticed a big difference immediately in how sharp my pictures were, even when using the lens at the wide end (back then I was using slide film).

[david_lau3]

I have 3 IS lenses - 24-105/f4, 70-200/f4 and 300/f4. I will have IS on all the time during handhold and on monopod. I will switch IS off when I mount 300/f4 on tripod. It has first generation IS which can not detect tripod mounting. For 24-105 and 70-200 I don't care as they can detect tripod mounting and switch IS off automatically.

 

I heard and beleive IS on may have some very little impact on sharpness, but the compensation on camera movement definitely offset such impact. At the end I always get a sharper picture with IS on.

[yakim_peled1]

>> On, all the time. I either handhold or use a monopod.

 

 

Same here. I bought an IS lens in the intent of using the IS........

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[mark_chappell]

All the time (24-105, 500/4, 100-400), except when the 100-400 is on a tripod (even then, I

sometimes forget to turn IS off an images are still good).

[digitmstr]

I have it on all the time. The vast majprity of my work (99.99%) is hand-held anyway so, wouldn't make sense for me to turn it off.

[m_barbu1]

All the time (EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM).

[gdanmitchell]

I leave it on all the time unless a) I'm shooting from the tripod, or b) I want motion blur.

[anson_ko]

I have it off most of the time. I will use IS in low light condition only to save more power. less battery drain. IT's your personal choice.

[tom_matus1]

100-400 USM L and I use it with the purchased intentions of leaving it ON! Now mode 1 or 2, that would be a better question. And beleive me when I say it buys you a couple stops... It does! Great lens and just get over the sticker shock!

[rogernoel]

I have it on all the time. EF 28-135; EF 70-300 and EFS 17-55. No impact on sharpness here. I would not be surprised that in the future, all the Canon lenses will have IS. Good Luck.

[znabal]

On my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS I keep it on all the time...unless of course I bump the switch to the off position, which I have done too often for my liking :(

[alan_myers]

Hi,

 

I've had 70-200/2.8 IS, 300/2.8 IS and 500/4 IS for over five years. I very rarely turn off IS on any of these lenses, whether handheld, on a monopod or on a tripod. Occasionally I'll use the single axis mode for panning shots. I've used long lenses for many years before getting the Canon IS and have pretty technique, but my percentage of "keepers" has definitely increased a lot with the IS lenses.

 

In addition, I've used the 28-135 IS quite a bit and find it useful on that lens, too. This lens has one of the simpler forms of IS that would need to be turned off when on a tripod. On the other hand, it's a focal length range that's most likely handheld.

 

Personally, I'd want and would use IS, if available, on any lens 85 or 100mm or longer. One exception: I don't think it's all that useful for higher magnification macro work, so I don't really miss it on 100/2.8 Macro.

 

IS on wide lenses is of little practical use to me, but probably won't do any harm either.

 

IS does add some complexity to lens design, so there might be some very small effect on optical image quality. Let me emphasize "very small". I'd think you would have to run some very serious tests to find it, and in the real world stabilization far offsets any slight effect of an extra element or two.

 

Perhaps some folks are mistaking subject blur for lack of lens sharpness. IS can do nothing to offset subject movement and slow shutter speeds. In other words, if photographing a subject that's moving by you fast enough to require 1/400 to freeze it, you'll still need 1/400 to insure that subject is sharp, with or without IS. I think this might be a common mistake by folks who are relatively new to using stabilization.

 

I believe IS has proven even more valuable on crop-sensor D-SLRs I now use with the same lenses. These cameras essentially "magnify" the opportunity for camera movement effects by 1.6X. The rule of thumb used to be to choose a shutter speed that's the reciprocal of the lens' focal length. So when shooting at normal distances with a 100mm lens mounted on a full frame/35mm film camera, for example, this suggests we use 1/100 or faster (possibly rounded to 1/125 on cameras that don't have 1/100 shutter speed) to best avoid camera movement blur. Use 1/200 for a 200mm lens, 1/50 for a 50mm lens, etc.

 

However, with the same 100mm non-IS lens mounted on a 1.6X crop-sensor D-SLR, it would be wise to change the minimum shutter speed to 1/160. Likewise, use 1/320 with the 200mm and 1/80 with the 50mm. So, IMHO, IS is even more useful with tele lenses on these cameras.

[alan_myers]

<I've used long lenses for many years before getting the Canon IS and have pretty technique, but my percentage of "keepers" has definitely increased a lot with the IS lenses.>

 

Okay, here's what I meant to type:

 

I've used long lenses for a long time before getting into Canon IS stuff and, over the years, learned a number of good techniques to keep shots steady. But I gotta say my percentage of "keepers" has definitely increased significantly with IS lenses.

[chris_mills1]

I've had the 70-200/2.8 IS for a couple years and I use it all the time. I think I've turned

off the IS once in that time (for a long exposure shot at night on a tripod). I leave it on

even when using a tripod.

 

Your question seems to ask whether there is a difference in sharpness when turning the IS

feature on or off on a lens with IS. I have not seen any difference of this sort. I have seen

a difference in sharpness between the IS and non-IS versions of the lens -- though a very

minor one. I think this difference is probably due to the increased number of elements in

the IS version of the lens.

 

I compared the IS and non-IS versions of the lens prior to buying the IS version. At the

time I was shooting almost all handheld, available light shots, so this is how I compared

the two. Both lenses are quite sharp.

 

At shutter speeds greater than 1/250th (i.e. - where my hand stability had no effect) I

found the older, non-IS lens to be a little sharper. The IS lens, however, resulted in a

couple of keepers shot wide open at 200mm and 1/30th of a second. There is simply no

way I could have gotten those shots without IS. This is what convinced me to fork over the

extra cash and get the IS version of the lens. I have been very happy with that decision.

 

cheers,

 

Chris