View Single Post
      08-11-2011, 04:15 PM   #1225
dcstep
Major General
United_States
1291
Rep
7,389
Posts

Drives: '09 Cpe Silverstone FR 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Colorado

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2009 M3  [8.40]
Quote:
Originally Posted by khaye1 View Post
i'm contemplating getting 70-200 f4L...the question is, is it worth getting the IS version? It's twice the price...not sure if I need IS at 200.

I'll mostly use this lens for wildlife, landscape and the occasional holiday trip to disneyland for their christmas parades.

I didn't want to create a new topic for this question so I figured I'll post it here.

edit: this will also be my very first L lens
Yes, get the IS if you can afford it. I use mine for wildlife, travel, scenics and portraits. It's wonderfully sharp, but I often find myself shooting it at under 1/100-second particularly for portrait and scenics. Also, for wildlife, I'll put the 1.4x TC on it and shoot at high ISOs and low shutter speeds, wide open in the predawn light.

I use it on a 5D MkII and a 7D. Believe me, the sharpness is exceptional when you do it right. It's a wonderful lens, rivalling my 500mm in IQ.

Here's an example, hand held at 1/60-sec, f/9 and ISO 800 at 250mm (1.4x TC attached, obviously). Close, dark bird in shade. I needed DOF and high-ISO, resulting in slow SS:


Red-vented bulbul by dcstep, on Flickr

IS makes such things easy.

Dave
__________________
Appreciate 0