Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Hi,

I use the 60d for video. Loved it a lot. Currently, I shoot the Tokina 11-16mm (<=love this guy), Canon 28mm f1.8, and Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. Very happy with all three of them and would like to get something that can get me closer to the objects.

I am looking into the Canon 70-200mm f2.8. Most of my shoot is for weddings and kids recitals and they will most likely be on a tripod. So, my question is: IS or no IS? I read somewhere that to shoot video, the IS needs to be turned off (don't remember where I read this so it could be totally bogus). So, do you think no IS will be sufficient for what I do? How would I benefit from a lens with IS (given I don't do handheld)? IS is almost $1k more!!!

Any pointers appreciated.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Spent the last 3 days in Phoenix using my 70-200 with the I.S. off.
This lens is really best on a tripod, so I.S. is really not needed.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Hi Aaron,

I use my IS version for the processional on a monopod and am very glad to have it stabilized. There are two modes to the IS - one is for lateral movement so it doesn't grab and release on pans - something I've never seen in of my shots even when tracking the processional and recessional from the corner. For dual angles on the vows I use two Tokina 80-200 f2.8 ATX zooms - both were around $150 on eBay.

There's an OM version on ebay right now at $260, though that is on the high side for what they've gone for in the past:

Olympus Tokina ATX 80-200mm f2.8 fast OM Zoom lens M-! | eBay

And here is a Nikon mount:

http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-AIS-MOUNT-...#ht_2801wt_939

Notice though that it doesn't have the tripod mount. Its a heavy lens, and though the camera mount is strong enough its very front-heavy with this combination. The small metal tripod mount by itself very rarely comes up for auction.

And another Nikon, but the internals aren't as clearly visible so there could be haze or fungus. Some haze can be easily cleaned so you can pick up a bargain - I sent both of my Tokina's in to the Tokina factory service center for cleaning, lubes and adjustments for a little over $100 each.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tokina-AF-80-200...9#ht_500wt_922

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Hi Joel, Rusty,

Big thanks for your reply.

Joel: The tokina is definitely worth looking into because it is a fraction of the canon's price, even at used price. Given you have both, how do you compare the tokina with the Canon 70-200 IS?

I am not sure if you have tested this but on the canon, if you set it on a tripod, can you tell any difference with or without IS?

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

PMJI -

Quite a while back, Philip Bloom blogged that IS was, in his opinion, essential even for a tripod mounted 70-200 as just touching the camera or lens (e.g. to adjust focus during an interview) would create visible wobble that an IS system would soak up.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

If you do a quick search in the 7D section (and probably 5DMkII one too) you'll see this question (IS or not IS?) comes up pretty regularly and gets discussed at length with opinions on boths sides.

I'm in the IS camp and I am well prepared to pay the extra for the ability to switch it on when I need it - and I need it more often than I imagined I would (yes even on a good tripod). For impromptu hand held it can work wonders. If you have the dosh, go for it. However, be warned IS makes a lot of noise so any on-camera sound is a no no.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Aaron, get IS version you'll be glad you did;
without IS even when you indoor, on solid ground and on the tripod, slight focus adjustment at 200mm will be noticed,(or you need to use heavy tripod), but when hundred people jumping around, and you can feel shaking floor under your feet, even heavy tripod will not save your footage,
plus, anytime I can grab the camera and do long hand held shot without running across the hall with the tripod, and it looks great, even @200mm, it's not shaky, it has nice cinematic frame drifting look, without IS hand held (and I mean hand held not on the shoulder rig) DSLR footage is not usable;
are you saying that sound from DSLR mike without IS motor noise is OK? :)

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Any on camera sound is rarely perfect as that's usually the worst place to have a mic (handling noise, operator breathing/sniffing etc. noise, too far from talent... and yes might pick up IS from the lens as being discussed here). I'd never use the built-in mic as that really is C£%p. We ALL know this as your smiley indicates!

That being said sometimes in run-n-gun (which DSLRs are not best suited for anyway), then an on-board plugged in shotgun, DAR etc. on a bracket or rig etc. may be the only practical way to get reasonable sound. Do what works best for you.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

I have the Tamron 70-200 2.8 Non-IS lens and I use it all the time. It has absolutely beautiful image quality but I would never dream of using it without a tripod. I have rented and used the Canon version with IS and I can tell you that it is indeed worth the price of admission.

My vote is FOR Image Stabilization. I love this Tamron for the price and it has served me extremely well, but I would love it more as a back up to a Canon 70-200 2.8 with IS.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

IS will definitely come in handy whether you think so or not. Keep in mind I always prefer to shoot on sticks. One night I was at home when breaking news went down close to home. I took my 60D and my 70-200 is with me, I also always leave sticks in the car.... Well as soon as I arrived on scene I grabbed my tripod and one of the legs fell off!!! I had no time to fix it so I went free hand and believe me, the IS saved the day. You could be shooting a wedding and next thing you know the tripod goes bad or you cant get a decent angle on the tripod, you will be glad you have IS.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

More info on 70-200 IS
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...l-old-new.html

I just bought the new canon 70-200 IS it is definitely worth the money, if you buy the lens for video you have to have IS, I think that goes with any lens if you can afford it definitely buy it.

I know you're not supposed to shoot with the 70-200 handheld, but I tried it with IS the footage was very useful comparing shooting without IS.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

There are two IS versions of the Canon 70-200 f2.8 lens. The new one ie. the Canon EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM is a very sharp lens. You can put a converter on it and get increased focal length. The IS is latest generation with about 4 stops benefit. You will love it both for stills as well as filming.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

I just rented the newest version (the isII version, that is) and shot, hand-held, in Times Square. It was amazing- simply amazing. I had rented the Red Rock mount because everyone kept saying how impossible it is to shoot at 200mm hand-held, and that's true in the old world of non-IS, but this new lens is insane. Zoomed all the way in, I consistently got beautiful tracking shots of pedestrians crossing the street, cars, cops standing around, you name it. I didn't even use the Red Rock mount- a total waste of money. I got better results cradling the camera in my arms (with that heavy lens) and just rack zooming or focusing as I shot. Of course, turn the IS off and it's a horrid mess, but I can't describe, with words, how mind-blowingly stable that lens is. My question isn't IS or not, it's how much better the new IS II version is from the older, IS version of the same lens that's a decade old, since the price difference is a THOUSAND BUCKS! Or even more, how much better it is than other manufacturers' IS of that same lens? I have to imagine they don't come close, but I haven't seen a single video-to-video comparison, so I'm going to have to do my own as soon as I have time. If this new Canon lens has no equal, then I have to say, it's worth the money if you need that shot, as crazy as that sounds since it's the cost of three t2i's.

Since you live in New Jersey, one thing you might want to do is rent the lenses at Adorama in NYC and test them yourself. They are cheap to rent for a day!

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I will definitely test drive both versions out to see it for myself; But I think I am sold for the IS version.

Re: Canon 70-200mm 2.8---IS or No IS?
 

aaron- just remember, both 2.8 lenses are IS lenses. the question isn't IS or NO IS, it's which of the two flavors of IS you're willing to go with- is I or is II.