Canon 70 - 200 f2.8? Is IS needed?
 

Looking to buy another lens for the kit and I'm thinking about the Canon 70-200 f2.8. I know the price difference between the IS lens and the non-IS lens is bout 500.00. When shooting video (mostly off a tripod) with this lens. Is IS on the lens needed? (yes I know that is a subjective question) But, in general is the extra 500 worth it for video?

I don't think it's worth it if you'll be on sticks.
Btw, you can get the same specs for less money from Tamaron. They make good glass too.

Thanks I just ordered the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and hoping for the best I have read good things about it. What really sold me on it is that it's Para-focal like the Canon L's which is why I'm looking at the 70 - 200. Is the Tamron Para-focal also? I spent too many years setting focus like that and it makes life a lot easier for me. That and if you have a steady hand you can do some zoom in and out shots with the DSLR.

jerry,

did you purchase the Tamron VC(vibration Compensation) version or non VC?

I bought the VC version, it should be here tomorrow. I went with VC on this one because it will be the walk-around lens and if I'm going hand held it's light enough that my skinny body can pull it off for more than 45 seconds... LOL

where did you purchase? i've been looking for one in stock? thanks!

Just to throw this in... The 70-200 2.8 L IS is getting replaced buy the IS II and the IS one's will be discounted. The L is a much better lens (coming from photography) and the IS would definitely help out on the long end (in video IMO).

I would watch B&H in the next week or so to keep tabs on the 70-200's price. I it was $1500 a few months back and recently was raised to $2k. If it gets back to $1500 or below, I'm definitely picking that up. There are a number of places to rent this lens by the week, and it's only about $150 or so for 7 days.

Calumet had it in stock on Monday. I called and they shipped it the same day.

Thanks Dave,
I have a guy coming over right now to pick up the JVC HD110 so I will have the cash to jump when/if the price drops. At 1,500 that's hard to pass up.

IS is really good for long lenses and hand held shooting, but when you're using a tripod, you should really turn it off if you plan on panning or tilting.

Are IS lenses meant for still photography still useful in video mode? Or are we just talking about the benefits of IS with stills?

I have heard that IS for stills is a godsend and allow 1-2 stops lower shutter speed for the same stability.

I have a 7D with the kit 28-135 lens with IS. I haven't done a lot of testing but I heard that IS DLSR stabilization is not really on par with dedicated camcorder image stabilization. Like the lens and the camera communicate and the lens tells the camera to fire off when it knows it's stable. Supposedly this makes it 'jerky' in video mode. Of course I have no proof of this. But I'd like to hear reports from people that are using IS and non IS lenses.

I have a Tamron 2.8 17-50 non-IS and I will be getting a Tamron 2.8 17-50 IS on Friday (from Amazon). The Tamron I like it so far, it seems, from initial testing to be pretty sharp and fast. I hope the IS version is as well. if so I'll probably return the non-IS one.

Well I just got off the phone with Tamron USA and asked about the 70-200 f2.8 and they assured me that it is also Parfocal. For $680.00 bucks it really seems like a good deal for what I'm going to do with this camera and that is shoot 95% video with it. The lens has great reviews on B&H so I think I might have to go this route. Any one here have one? Can you confirm that it is Parfocal? (and that it is reliably parfocal)

IS is a must if you are handheld or support by some kind of shouldermount, all you have to do is zoom in all the way with your 28-135, hold it as still as possible and then turn off the IS and you will see its benefit.

Exactly. What happens if you pan or tilt is that the IS sees it as camera movement and tries to correct it so as you pan it tries to fight you by shifting the image back the way you've come from - and it makes you dizzy!
The only thing it is good for is when you're locked off in windy conditions.
Steve

I totally agree with Khoi Pham, I've done quite a few shots using the 7D and my preferred style is to go handheld. I'm using the kit lens (18 - 135) and it comes with IS.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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 )