Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Is Worth Paying That Much More For?  
User currently offlineMartinairYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2003, 1209 posts, RR: 7
Posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2285 times:

Here is my situation:

300D coming in my hands in about a month or so with a kit lens. I want to get a 75-300mm since I don't want to bust all my money on a 100-400 or 70-200. Yet i look at the 75-300 and the regular one is $149US and the IS is $414 US..... in my position, or in general, is the IS worth $250 more for a lens that you may not use for such a long time?


Chelsea Football Club supporter.
2 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineINNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2268 times:

It all depends on what you want to do. Do you want shoot at slow shutters like 1/100 and below? Do you want to shoot fast subjects like at airshows, you want to shoot in low / bad light?

If not, just for normal av.photography without IS will fit your needs!



Jet Visuals
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2266 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Martin,

The bottom line is budget. I have the IS version, having previously had the standard lens. There is no doubt that the IS lens provides a lot more flexibility - for example, being able to keep the aperture relatively small (to help with the photo quality) without losing the photo to blur. Also, contrail shots are possible with this lens that I don't think would be with the standard one - again because you do need to watch your f-number to maximise quality.

So the IS really does make a difference, but there is also no doubt that the lens is somewhat soft at the long end of the zoom. You can read more information in this thread.

All I can say is I am glad I made the upgrade. But I still am a bit envious of those guys with the 'L' lenses - they do make a difference to quality. Though with good editing technique the IS lens is more than acceptable.

Hope this helps.

Paul


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is This Unique Enough To Make Up For Poor Light? posted Fri Jul 28 2006 05:55:08 by Fiveholer
Calling EF 300 F2.8 Is L Owners- Is It Worth It? posted Wed Jul 12 2006 16:41:05 by Tin67
Who Is The Guy Behind That (white/black) Lens? posted Thu Sep 8 2005 14:10:17 by AKE0404AR
Is This Worth Uploading? posted Mon Jun 27 2005 20:55:49 by Viv
Is A Bizjet Worth Priority Screening? posted Sat Jun 4 2005 12:54:41 by Sean377
Is This Worth It? posted Wed Jun 1 2005 04:47:27 by DLKAPA
Is This Worth A Go? posted Tue Jan 11 2005 09:30:04 by Sulman
Is This Worth Uploading posted Sat Jan 1 2005 00:44:25 by COAMiG29
Canon 100-400L : Is It Worth It? posted Tue Nov 16 2004 21:53:28 by Dlx737200
MCO Is It Worth It? posted Fri Oct 22 2004 16:31:03 by Gmonney