 BetterPhoto Member |
Image Stabilization Lens With the current line of Canon lenses, is it still better to buy a fast lens, 2.8? Or is it OK to go with a slower lens with image stabilization (IS)? It goes against all my past knowledge to do that, but I'm wondering if the technology is so good it does not matter. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
IS is a great feature for getting sharp shots hand-held without blurring from camera shake. It is not a replacement for f/2.8 or faster lenses when the primary concern is shallow depth of field, or a fast shutter speed to freeze subject motion. Thus, some of Canon's f/2.8 lenses also incorporate IS (eg., EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM, EF 300 f/2.8L IS USM).
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ron Taylor |
Just a second "Amen" to the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM. I have a several other IS lenses and the 70-200 is my favorite by far. Great lens!
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||