tim_miller7

Alan,

 

Could I trouble you for a few examples of what you are shooting where IS makes the difference and at what shutter speed? Pictures or descriptions - whatever is easiest.

 

Thanks.

I have the lens and body you are referring to and often shoot gymnastics in a poor light, where stop action is very important. Typically I am at 1/250 to 1/320, F2.8, and 1600 ISO are needed to getting something reasonable. As for those who say you need the IS, I am not convinced, as I have NEVER taken a pictures indoors of action based subjects at anything slower than the above mentioned speeds. Even the awards ceremony I shoot at 1/125 on a monopod, and I still get motion blur and softness which IS didnt correct.

 

I struggled with the IS vs Non-IS question until I borrowed an IS copy of the 70-200,2.8 and didn't see much of a difference. I am very satisfied with my choice, but this wasnt an IS vs. Non-IS. The 70-200 is my favorite lens in the gym. Buy it!

I bought the non-IS, then worried every time I used the lens that I was missing something. My camera shop (Ken-Mar in NY, AAA rating) lent me the IS lens. I spend most of my time taking pictures indoors of gymnastics, 2.8, 170mm-200mm, 1/200-1/320 to stop the action, and 800-1600 ISO.

 

I couldn't tell the difference between the 2 lenses, perhaps someone with alot more experience could, but I couldn't nor could anyone else who looked at the pictures.

 

Perhaps if I were taking pictures at 1/15, I might be able to appreciate the IS, but even with a tripod, unless I was doing portrait work (which I have another lens for) I never shoot that slow. If you do, then you should have the IS version. I would be interested in what the subject matter is that IS users are taking pictures of at that speed.

I have a couple of IS lenses and the same 70-200/2.8 non IS which I use to shoot gymnastics indoor under terrible lighting and I have found that I almost never shoot slower than 1/200 (at 2.8 and 1600 ISO) and it actually is closer to 1/320 and faster on a 30D body. I find that I can not stop action with a shutter speed any slower than that where I would expect IS to really help.

 

My other lenses with the IS are great, especially considering they are 4.0-5.6 and the shutter speed is pretty slow indoors. I have borrowed a 70-200/2.8 IS and couldn't really tell the difference, but I also wasn't shooting anything less than the above mentioned speeds. I needed to know for fact whether I really needed the IS or not. I dont.

 

I guess, as others have mentioned, if you need to stop the action, IS doesn't help, but if you shooting static objects in low light, without a tripod, IS is better than non IS.

 

Good luck.

I guess what I am looking for is something with a little more reach. The 70-200 does that well, but doesnt have much on the short, wide end. I thought the 28-135 would be a intermediate step; I already have a 50 and 85 prime. Is there a noticiable difference in sharpness compared to the 17-85? I seemed to get the idea there was a sharpness issue. Perhaps I need to check the archives.

 

OK - if not the 28-135, then what? What would you get, for less than $750.00, that covers a similar range.

I have always been blah about my EFS 17-85 IS lens - good closeup, but not

really a zoom, pretty slow - but this weekend I was reading about a EF 28-135 IS

lens for about $350.00. Does anyone have any hands-on experience with the lens

and what are their thoughts. This would be a primary lens for an XTI which I

use less often now I have a 30D/70-200 combo. Also, what do they use the lens

for? Nature? Portrait, etc?

I need software to put an MPG slide show file onto a DVD playable disc. What do

the people in this forum use? Sonic? Pinnacle? Premiere?

 

I have a ton of pictures I

took on a 30D, then assembled them into an MPG, that I would like to be able to

distribute to friends for viewing on a DVD player.

When you say distance is not related to WB, if the closest I can get the white card is where I will be taking pictures, wont I be in a different light source and a different balance level?

 

For example, I was standing on light grey carpeting on a mezzanine, overlooking a cobalt blue gymnastics floor. The blue floor was lit with typical HID lights, but the mezzanine was lit with tube flourcents.

 

I like the idea of a manual K setting; is there anyway to see what the K setting is for a given custom WB setting? or are the 2 different things; apples and oranges. I know that I could shoot raw, and I am comfortable post processing, but I will take around 2500 pictures of 18 gymnasts over the course of 1 meet. The closer I can get what I want without PP, the less work I have to do later.

 

Thanks in advance for your help.

One thing that no one is mentioning is the IS will not stop your subject if they are in motion. If you are taking low light pictures of static subjects, the IS is great - but taking an action picture will not be improved by the IS. I borrowed an 70-200 2.8 IS lens and took a bunch of pictures of a gymnastics event, and I couldn't see a difference between the IS and non-IS, unless I was shooting as less than 1/125th. Then there was a large difference.

 

But at 1/200th or greater there wasn't enough of a difference, in my opinion, to warrant the expense.

I have been having trouble with WB in a low light gymnasium setting where I

cant get close enought to manually set the White Balance in my 30d. I was

returning a loaner lens at my local shop, and they recommended the "Expodisc"

which you snap onto the front of your lense, turn the AF off, and take a

picture at the prevalent light source.

 

After manually setting the WB, it seems to do a nice job of correcting it, but

does anyone have any experience with a long distance picture (say 200mm) using

the exposdisc?

 

Is there a better way to manually set WB?

I installed the software that came with my XTI, probably because I didnt know any better. Then I discovered Picasa. I know, it isnt CS2, but for ease of use and price (FREE!) how can you go wrong, especially when you have a company like google behind it. It will take care of the items you mentioned, plus much more.

 

I especially like the web albums feature; which I ungraded to 25gig for 100 bucks - pretty cheap to have a catalog of everything accessable from anywhere.

I have an XTI I got last fall, took a couple of K worth of pictures, then just bought the 30D.

 

I am not a professional but after about 5 minutes of fooling around with the 30D, I then took the attached picture as my first shot just to see how it would handle low light. Others may have a different opinion, but I wish I had bought the camera sooner.

 

Spend the money; you can wait the rest of your life for the next best "thing"; but some things never happen again.

 

Tim Miller

Thanks to all for their opinions, looks like I am pretty much stuck. I have an 85/1.8 and a 50/1.4, neither gets me close enough, and the 70-200/2.8 is about as fast as I am going to get for the focal length. The only stone unturned would be IS, but because of my fast shutter speed, IS is pretty much negated, right? Is that a correct assumption that because I need to stop the action, IS doesn't get me anything except additional expense. I have an IS 17-85mm f4/5.6 and in low light, it doesnt handle motion well at all. Any last thoughts? Anyone?<div></div>

I have read so many things regarding the XTI and 30D about noise; I am starting

to get confused. I have found the 30D compared to the 5D and other MFG brands,

and it looked really good comparatively, but never head to head with the XTI.

Does any one know which is better and why. I know - the XTI has more pixels, but

more isnt always better, especially if you arent cropping your pictures by huge

amounts then trying to print posters.

 

I shoot teenage gymnastics (low fluorescent lighting, dark back grounds and

corners, fast motion, long distances, no flash - all the hard things to do at

once) with an XTI coupled to a 70-200L 2.8, NON IS, manually set at 2.8 and

1/320 or faster, and 1600 ISO, with some pretty nice results - except for the

noise. I know, I can post process, but I was looking for less noise from the start.

 

Is the 30D the answer? Or should I just start to save for the 5D? Or should I

just shut up and deal with having to batch process almost 2000 images (yes, I

took 2000 pictures at the last meet; I only junked about 350; still more than

1500 is a lot to fiddle with). It would be nice to shoot in JPG and get it right

from the start.<div></div>

I bought an XTI body in November for shooting gymnastics. I have pretty much

convinced myself to move to the 30D (less noise, faster fps are primary

reasons). What is the XTI body really worth in the used market. I have taken

perhaps 6000 pictures and the body is as clean as can be; no nicks, dings or

wayward mustard (dont ask). It would also come with an extra battery and the

BG-E3 grip. What would be a fair selling price? I am torn between keeping it as

a backup or getting it out of my camera bag.