High ISO vs. IS lens

[wei_wang4]

The high iso quality of newer grneration digital SLR such as EOS 50D and 5D mark2 is getting so good that we can

routinely use up to ISO 1600 (or even 3200) and got quite acceptable results. My question is that should I buy the 70-

200 L instead of the 70-200 L IS and turn up the ISO to overcome handshake and save 400 dollars. Any opinion or

comment? thanks.

[nhut-nguyen]

IMO If you can afford the IS over the non IS, you should get it, because there's time that you'll need both high ISO and IS.

[JDMvW]

Like Sinh,I feel there are just those time when you need both, and the more you've got, the more you'll want.

 

I think that IS is worth every penny.

[robert_tan1]

i have the sony a200k,so far so good..iso 3200 and the low light feature is marvellous..IS in camera..works well

[scott_ferris]

Get the IS in my very un-humble opinion.

 

Well I would/did, but it really depends on what you are going to do with your pictures.

[john clark]

A lot boils down to how much you would have to pay extra in order to get the IS. I had a chance of a 70-200/4L for £300, which compared to roughly £700 for the IS version. In my mind, the IS *isn't* worth more than doubling the cost, so I went with the cheaper lens, but then I tend to shoot moving subjects with it (i.e. my son, pets) rather than static subjects and the IS wouldn't really help me there... so take into account your own shooting preferences also...

[PuppyDigs]

Fast aperture, IS and high ISO--sometimes you need all three to get the shot.

[colin carron]

I agree with the 'get S' camp. It makes a huge difference whn shooting with telephotos hand-held.

[chinmaya]

I agree with John Clark. It depends on what you shoot and when you shoot.

 

I use 70-200mm F4 non-is. I use mostly when I hike, sometimes I do feel that I need IS but, that's like 20-30% of the time may be. I am not convinced of paying 1000 USD for the IS version yet. I was thinking rather I buy 100-400mm IS.

 

I love the IQ to price ratio of this non-is lens.

[yakim_peled1]

>> Fast aperture, IS and high ISO--sometimes you need all three to get the shot.

 

I agree. Don't give anything up.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[pjmeade]

I'm holding my hands up with Puppy and Yakim. There are times when you need all three.

 

Yes, you can get good shots with two of the three under challenging conditions, but it's better (and more expensive) to cover every option.

 

My 2p

 

P

[sarah_fox]

I agree with the above. However, I'll also add that you won't get the quality from ISO 1600 and 3200 that you will get from ISO 100, no matter the camera -- barring paradigm-changing advances in technology. The weak point will be in the shadow detail, where you'll see a lot of noise. That said, I've always been a low-ISO stalwart, having shot lots of ISO 32 in my youth, and having shot mostly ISO 100 up until now. Even *I* am starting to dial up the ISO with my 5D. I don't hesitate to go up to 400 if I really need it, and even 800 or 1600 when I'm not depending on good shadow detail. My default is still 100, though.

[JDMvW]

Well, Sarah and others, I started out shooting with ASA (yes) 10 film and cried when they took away my ASA 25

Kodachrome. All the same, I also shot a lot of hi-speed GAF and Ektachrome. In the old days, if you didn't have

two bodies, you were doomed to shoot in daylight with the latter if you hadn't used it up the night before. Sort

of like the common discovery that I make that I'm still shooting at ISO 3200 because I forgot to turn it back

down the next morning ;)

 

Any of us who had to do our available darkness with a f/1.2 lens and GAF at 1000 will never, ever be bothered by

a little dark field noise when we look at the grain on our old slides. Just embrace it! Look at the pretty

rainbow colors in the areas that are supposed to be black.

[desmond_kidman]

If you don't like noise (grain?) get the IS. There is a price to pay when going up a couple of steps in ISO if you want to be able to crop and/or enlarge. Chances are the lens you get will not be outdated soon, but the cameras will continuing to evolve, so most of us will be changing bodies more than lenses. So put the money in the lens. Get the IS.

[albert lui]

In addition to the benefits already mentioned by the earlier posters, telephoto photography is more enjoyable with an IS lens. Having a stabilized view is nice - no more headache inducing blur.