Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    79

    Image Stabalization

    hey i read somewhere you shouldnt always have IS on? why is that? and what would happen if it is

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,129
    There's a (practically imperceptible) drain on battery life to have IS on, but the only real reason you'd want to turn IS off is if you had your camera mounted on a tripod. It will look for, and try to compensate for movement that isn't there sometimes and can actually create movement in that case.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    I had my Canon 70-300IS giving me some very strange movements when I held it steady. The sensor kept moving the element resulting in very strange results.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,313
    The newest IS lenses are able to detect if they are on a tripod.
    The respect of those you respect is greater than the applause of the multitude.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    529
    My 70-300IS is perfect, even on a tripod with IS switched on
    | Canon 7D| Canon 5D|Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS| Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II |
    my photos on flickr

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    539
    not sure if it will do something weird on a rocking boat

    but if you are running out of juice without a spare, definitely turn it off
    To err is human, to crop divine.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    126
    Im looking at getting a new telephoto lens for my XTi. Would i get the same results with a 75-300mm USM III and a tripod that i would get with a 70-300mm USM IS? is IS just to reduce camera shake when u can't use a tripod? Should i just be looking at getting a non IS and a tripod and save a couple hundred?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    3,209
    good tripods cost alot more than IS.

    the optics aren't very good in the 75-300 either. i'd go 70-200mm f/4L or 70-300 IS.
    40d | 5d mk II | 2.8/16 zenitar fisheye | 16-35L | 35L | sigma 1.4/50 | sigma 2.8/50 Macro | sigma 1.4/85 | 70-200L IS
    website
    disclaimer: posts are for personal entertainment only...not to be taken seriously...ever.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    Quote Originally Posted by adam75south View Post
    good tripods cost alot more than IS.

    the optics aren't very good in the 75-300 either. i'd go 70-200mm f/4L or 70-300 IS.
    I have the 70-300 IS. The optics are OK but are far better on the 70-200 f4L (non-IS) for the same price.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •