Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canon 70-200 2.8L Is Versus NON Is  
User currently offlineMongorat From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 165 posts, RR: 13
Posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5652 times:

Greetings to all...I'm in the market for some "L" glass and have narrowed the choice down to two lenses; the Canon 70-200MM 2.8L IS, and the NON IS version. The price difference is on average about $500-$600 between these two lenses. Having in mind that I will also use the lens with either the 1.4 or 2.0 converters, is the lens equipped with "IS" really necessary for aviation photography? I do most if not all of my shooting in "normal" lighting as opposed to "low light" situations where "IS" may really help. Any thoughts or opinions would be appreciated.

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5641 times:

IS isn't only good for low light, it's also good for telephotos, especially above 200mm. The real question, is whether it is worth the $500-$600.

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1060 posts, RR: 33
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 5611 times:

Well you really need to ask yourself exactly what do you want to use it for.
If you want to really push your photographythen i'd say spend the extra now to save later.
The non IS is from most reports at FM's a slightly sharper lens.However the IS on the 2.8 is worth a minimum of 3 stops and is a great piece of technology allowing shots like this.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Howie


IS in itelf is handy for windy conditions to allow you to maintain a low ISO without blurr etc.
At the end of the day IS is a huge advantage which comes to the fore inpoor light but nevertheless is a handy aid even in reasnoble light.
Enjoy choosing
Darren



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5604 times:

I have the 70-200 L'IS and it's a cracker. I do love it but whan at Waddington the IS kept causing an Error 01 on the camera. I nearly threw the dam lens down one of the intakes of the jet fighters.
However since that day it hasn't given me any problems.
From my research I found that the IS can give problems on the 70-200, 300, and the 100-400.

Hope that helps

Fergul Big grin  sun 



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5600 times:

I can't speak about Canon, but I have the Nikkor 80-400 with VR (Nikon's version of IS), and it really does work very well.

However, I have not tried to throw it into a jet engine.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineLHRSIMON From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 1343 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5575 times:

I have the 70-200 L IS USM and i have to say it's the GOD of all lenses !!!!! If you can afford it GET IT. It also works very well with the 1.4 extender.So with that combo you have superb coverage from 100 to 280 mm !!! !!!!!

Simon C
 

[Edited 2005-07-14 11:56:49]

[Edited 2005-07-14 11:57:28]


Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 53
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5561 times:

Quoting LHRSIMON (Reply 5):
I have the 70-200 L IS USM and i have to say it's the GOD of all lenses !!!!! If you can afford it GET IT. It also works very well with the 1.4 extender.So with that combo you have superb coverage from 100 to 280 mm !!! !!!!!

I echo Simons comments on this lens, it really is a superb lens. I hope I didn't put you off about the problems with the IS but just to be aware of it that it can cause a problem. Would I buy this lens again, YES, without any hesitation. Like Simon said, it's still excellent with the 1.4 TC.

Fergul Big grin  sun 



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineMongorat From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 165 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5535 times:

Thanks to everyone for your responses. Seems the consensus is clear and it has made the choice between the two lenses clear in my mind. Maybe I should have mentioned I don't have have the "worlds steadiest hands" either!! Looks like the "IS" is the no-brainer choice. Thanks again and cheers to all.

User currently offlineTACAA320 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5474 times:

Quoting Mongorat (Reply 7):
Maybe I should have mentioned I don't have have the "worlds steadiest hands" either!!

Maybe I have to mention that mine looks like a person with the Parkinson´s disease. Thanks God I don´t have it.


User currently offlineJK From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5463 times:

It's the best zoom you can get !!
Grrr Johan Knijn



Viva Tirol . . . . . . . .
User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5441 times:

I don't have one yet, but I'll be getting one within the year.
I've seen it at camera shows and it rocks !!

I'm getting older........(45 !!) and my hands aren't as steady as they
used to be either.........


Jay


User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5441 times:

If you have the extra cash, go for the IS version....pay it once and no regrets later.......

Vasco


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...
Canon 70-200 F/2.8L Vs. F/2.8L Is Vs. 35-350... posted Thu Aug 26 2004 01:19:56 by QantasA332
Anyone Shoot Canon 70-200 Is W/2x? posted Wed Feb 12 2003 23:40:31 by Planedoctor
Canon 70-200 L F4 Is USM posted Tue Dec 10 2002 16:34:45 by PRM
Canon 70-200 2.8 Is New? posted Tue Sep 4 2001 01:28:41 by Blackened
Why No 70-200 F4 Is? posted Tue May 25 2004 16:37:36 by Futterman
For Sale: Canon 70-200 F4L - $519.99 - US Only posted Thu May 4 2006 19:53:45 by VasanthD
Sigma Or Canon 70-200 F2.8? posted Thu Feb 2 2006 18:25:30 by Morvious
Canon 70-200 F2.8 +2x Vs 100-400 posted Wed Nov 30 2005 23:42:06 by Donder10
Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 EX Vs Canon 70-200 F/4L posted Fri Jul 22 2005 07:30:42 by DLKAPA
Canon 70-200 F2.8 USM posted Mon Oct 4 2004 21:30:12 by Jat74l