Canon 70 - 200 f2.8? Is IS needed?

Nigel Barker · November 8th, 2009, 04:32 PM

Quote:

At 135mm, it's really handy to have the IS. Seeing the benefits of the IS, I don't think I'll get another zoom lens without it.

For shooting hand held video IS is a real boon whatever the focal length of the lens. The wide end of the 24-105mm F4L is the widest stabilised EF lens that Canon make but I would love a 24mm lens with a larger aperture that had IS.

Mike Dulay · November 8th, 2009, 07:48 PM

I'm still saving my pennies for that 70-200 IS, and I'm curious how much it can tolerate. From the comments above it looks like it is a good supplement for existing stabilization (tripod/shouldermount). But how do you operate it handheld? Do you hold it like a rifle with one hand on the body and another on the tripod mount? How long can you hold that position steady?

I tried the neckstrap trick on my 85mm prime and the picture was still all over the place. Held with two hands seemed worse. I guess the balance is different with the prime being short. Makes me wonder how much gross movement the IS can tolerate.

Nigel Barker · November 9th, 2009, 01:59 AM

The Canon 70-200m F2.8L is pretty heavy & long. Using it hand held for video would be difficult even with IS. I would suggest that at the least a monopod is necessary because of the weight & balance.

Jerry Porter · November 9th, 2009, 06:59 AM

Well I got the Tamron 70 - 200 f2.8 and after messing with it over the weekend I can't imagine trying to shoot video with it handheld for any amount of time. I really don't belive any amount of IS would help it's just that nose heavy. Like I said in my original post that it would be used mostly on sticks and now I can say 99 percent of the time that will be the case. I also think that the Tamron is lighter than the Canon so it would be even worse.

Dale Baglo · November 9th, 2009, 12:48 PM

My bro is a pro news photog for a major daily newspaper. Here's his take on the 70-200:

"I'd go with the non-stabilized Canon lens. Less stuff to break down. I've got it on on my 70-200, but it's turned off. Burns batteries and I find it annoying when it shifts the image on you."

Jon Carlson · November 9th, 2009, 01:39 PM

I realize it's a little late for some, but I would be wary of the Tamron. I came very close to purchasing one for stills (I'm fairly happy with my 28-70mm Tamron), but held out for the Canon. Still haven't picked it up yet, but LensRentals.com is liquidating their entire stock of Tamron 70-200mm because of reliability issues.

It looks like they cleared out their Canon inventory already, but you can read about it on the Nikon version: LensRentals.com - Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 for Nikon

Thanks for the tip on the 70-200mm Canon being replaced. I need to get that in my kit (and yes, it's nearly impossible to shoot video handheld with that.)

Bill Pryor · November 23rd, 2009, 12:19 PM

Most people are not going to be using any lens that long for handheld work when shooting video. For stills, that's a different story. Even with IS and a shoulder mount, you're not going to get steady hand held shots on anything that's not pretty wide.

Keith Moreau · November 23rd, 2009, 12:41 PM

After trying video with excellent L glass without stabilization vs IS glass (non -L) I can say that non stabilized glass beyond about 60mm is not that useful unless you are on a tripod, and a steady one at that.

For handheld it's a must unless you are really wide. The main problem with the IS lenses is that they make a lot of noise while the IS is on. Any close mic will pick it up.

Khoi Pham · November 23rd, 2009, 01:10 PM

You guys need something like this:
Steady Stick
I can use it all day long, I use the mini one without the side bar, I borrowed a 70-200 IS from a photog friend and shot on it and it works just fine, I shot this video:

with a shorter lens and the steady stick but the 70-200with IS is just as stable with the steady stick.

Julius Kuziemski · November 24th, 2009, 03:13 AM

I can't suggest the Canon 70-200 IS enough. Its very light ( about 3lbs.), it works, and when the x2 extender is stuck on it, the IS is worth every bit of extra $ I spent for it.

I have not had the opportunity to get one of these yet, (Its on my list tho!)

BushHawk - Home

PS>thanks for the news bout the vers I possibly going down in cost ( I hate changing glass, so this would be excellent to get another one for my x2 unit )

November 8th, 2009, 07:48 PM	#17
Mike Dulay Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Somerville, NJ Posts: 304	How about IS handheld versus other stabilization? I'm still saving my pennies for that 70-200 IS, and I'm curious how much it can tolerate. From the comments above it looks like it is a good supplement for existing stabilization (tripod/shouldermount). But how do you operate it handheld? Do you hold it like a rifle with one hand on the body and another on the tripod mount? How long can you hold that position steady? I tried the neckstrap trick on my 85mm prime and the picture was still all over the place. Held with two hands seemed worse. I guess the balance is different with the prime being short. Makes me wonder how much gross movement the IS can tolerate. __________________ DIY, 35mm, HV20: http://www.primitivebuteffective.net

November 9th, 2009, 12:48 PM	#20
Dale Baglo Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Victoria, BC Posts: 64	My bro is a pro news photog for a major daily newspaper. Here's his take on the 70-200: "I'd go with the non-stabilized Canon lens. Less stuff to break down. I've got it on on my 70-200, but it's turned off. Burns batteries and I find it annoying when it shifts the image on you." __________________ Need a narration? www.dalebaglo.com

November 23rd, 2009, 01:10 PM	#24
Khoi Pham Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Dallas Posts: 747	You guys need something like this: Steady Stick I can use it all day long, I use the mini one without the side bar, I borrowed a 70-200 IS from a photog friend and shot on it and it works just fine, I shot this video: Emeraldcity on Vimeo with a shorter lens and the steady stick but the 70-200with IS is just as stable with the steady stick. __________________ Khoi Pham www.proeditproductions.com

November 24th, 2009, 03:13 AM	#25
Julius Kuziemski New Boot Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Estacada Posts: 21	IS for handheld, turn off when mounted I can't suggest the Canon 70-200 IS enough. Its very light ( about 3lbs.), it works, and when the x2 extender is stuck on it, the IS is worth every bit of extra $ I spent for it. I have not had the opportunity to get one of these yet, (Its on my list tho!) BushHawk - Home PS>thanks for the news bout the vers I possibly going down in cost ( I hate changing glass, so this would be excellent to get another one for my x2 unit )

November 9th, 2009, 01:59 AM	#18
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	The Canon 70-200m F2.8L is pretty heavy & long. Using it hand held for video would be difficult even with IS. I would suggest that at the least a monopod is necessary because of the weight & balance.

November 9th, 2009, 06:59 AM	#19
Jerry Porter Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Satellite Beach, Fl Posts: 784	Well I got the Tamron 70 - 200 f2.8 and after messing with it over the weekend I can't imagine trying to shoot video with it handheld for any amount of time. I really don't belive any amount of IS would help it's just that nose heavy. Like I said in my original post that it would be used mostly on sticks and now I can say 99 percent of the time that will be the case. I also think that the Tamron is lighter than the Canon so it would be even worse.

November 9th, 2009, 01:39 PM	#21
Jon Carlson Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Reading, PA USA Posts: 61	I realize it's a little late for some, but I would be wary of the Tamron. I came very close to purchasing one for stills (I'm fairly happy with my 28-70mm Tamron), but held out for the Canon. Still haven't picked it up yet, but LensRentals.com is liquidating their entire stock of Tamron 70-200mm because of reliability issues. It looks like they cleared out their Canon inventory already, but you can read about it on the Nikon version: LensRentals.com - Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 for Nikon Thanks for the tip on the 70-200mm Canon being replaced. I need to get that in my kit (and yes, it's nearly impossible to shoot video handheld with that.)

November 23rd, 2009, 12:19 PM	#22
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	Most people are not going to be using any lens that long for handheld work when shooting video. For stills, that's a different story. Even with IS and a shoulder mount, you're not going to get steady hand held shots on anything that's not pretty wide.

November 23rd, 2009, 12:41 PM	#23
Keith Moreau Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Brisbane, California Posts: 530	After trying video with excellent L glass without stabilization vs IS glass (non -L) I can say that non stabilized glass beyond about 60mm is not that useful unless you are on a tripod, and a steady one at that. For handheld it's a must unless you are really wide. The main problem with the IS lenses is that they make a lot of noise while the IS is on. Any close mic will pick it up.