don't know if "i need" other than i wanted for video work and was hoping that they lens would cross to wedding work. however, unless i can really hold the camera steady, im not sure i have a win win situation and it's a lot of money to have laying around for use only part of the time. :-(

To me, it's the opposite. I recently wrote the following on the 7D forum:
Well, I now tend to believe that the usefulness of the IS might be an urban legend -- at least I'm definitely sure that it's not "absolutely essential for video work." This I found out in a flukeish way after shooting an interview series, when halfway into it realized that I had forgotten to engage the IS (again using the 70-200L handheld). I was about to kick myself, embarrassed of my negligence, (I even contemplated to re-shoot the interviews that were now IS-less). However, when I got to the editing phase, I could not see any difference between the non-IS footage and the one shot with IS activated. (And yes, the IS in that lens works, or at least I can hear the motor).

-- peer

Peer, whether you need IS or not really depends on what you shoot. Considering the range of production out there, it isn't fair either way to say that you need IS or don't need IS (as we've discussed in the 7D forum already :) But I guarantee you, it isn't a myth.

A 200mm on a tripod shooting an interview? You'll never need IS.
That same 200mm, still on a tripod, shooting motorsports in 30mph winds? IS makes a difference (this was me, two weekends ago).

I've also shot out of a helicopter with the 24-105L IS with IS off and on. One was clean, the other was not in any way usable.

this is what i am saying. ive just put over 3,000 in lenses and shot my first wedding "temp" shoot (it was a video project and just took my 5dm2 and the two lenses) and did the job like it was real. the edges of the moving subjects are not crisp or clean and you can tell its from movement. feet are blurry and fingers look almost ghosted. it will NOT be sellable material in the end. my nikon d90 with a 100 dollar lens with stabilzation would sell better. and i had taken these pics with the 7d, i have a feeling i would be in court. thankfully im not there yet as i still have two weeks before my first production wedding shoot but as of this moment i'm in a rush to find an answer. ive contacted b&h and provided all the support info i can and hopefully will have some kind of solution by tomorrow because short of that, they close for about 5 days over a holiday and that will have me "at the wall" :-(

you should notice a big difference just looking in the viewfinder (easy to see with 5x or 10x magnification).. if you cant see any difference it is most likely broken, the IS components are quite fragile

Not fair..?! So it's not "fair" that I couldn't see any difference in my footage using IS vs non-IS...? Jeez.

But what you need, Dylan, is to read my post more thoroughly before replying. To help you out, I'll quote myself: "I had forgotten to engage the IS, again using the 70-200L handheld." I.e., no mention of a tripod, but handheld handheld handheld. Okay?!

-- peer

peer, r u saying in movie mode the 5dm2 will auto focus? continuously or when you hit the af button only? also, what about ability to manually control ISO during the shoot. is this capacity there?

This doesn't sound like it has anything to do with IS or lenses at all - blurring on the edge of moving subjects is due to low shutter speed, blurring of the entire frame is due to camera movement and can be improved with IS. What shutter speed did you shoot the wedding at?

Maybe I'm not quite getting the intent of some of the recent posts, but it seems as though there may be some misunderstanding of what the IS function does for you. It stabilizes camera shake and so allows you to use a slower shutter speed when photographing subjects. That helps tremendously to get a sharp image when something is static within the frame (no hand shakies), but if you're slowing the shutter speed to get the shot, it can hurt you when there is relative motion in the frame.

If you don't want motion blur, keep the shutter speed at least as fast as the length of the lens in mm, eg 1/200th for a 200mm lens. Any slower and something that's in motion relative to the framed image will be blurry even if you're using IS. With IS, you might shoot a very crisp image of a person at 1/80th and 200mm when they are standing still (and you otherwise might not have had enough light to get the shot), but when they go to scratch their nose, all the IS in the world won't prevent their arm being a blur.

EDIT: Looks like Evan said the same thing at the same time, but much more succinctly.

Pete's right, but you generally have different considerations for video - high shutter speeds tend to eliminate too much motion blur and create a stutter-y look in video. This is often used for a specific effect (opening scene of Saving Private Ryan, fight scenes in Gladiator, etc) but unless you know you want that effect you won't want to crank the shutter speed up. "Standard" shutter speeds will be 1/48 for 24p and 1/60 for 30p - lower than that and you'll get excessive blurring on movement (I suspect this is Rodger's issue), higher than that and you get the stutter effect from too little motion blur.

IS for video use is about making the shot look more stable, not about reducing blurriness. An important consideration for this is the type of IS a lens has - some have a 'panning' mode that only stabilizes vertical movement (i.e. 70-200 f/2.8 IS) , while others have only a single mode (i.e. 24-105mm f/4 IS). With the single IS lenses the IS can introduce it's own problems. If you pan or have a moving background in the shot the lens will try to stabilize this, hit the end of it's range of stabilization, then snap back to the middle of the stabilization range. This introduces a jerky, mechanical look to the motion of the shot - I've had it happen both on handheld shots where I was moving the camera and on shots from a moving vehicle where the subject and camera were still but the background was moving rapidly. It's a bit of a catch-22 with these lenses though - without IS a shot from a moving car would likely have too much vibration to be useable, with it you may get the IS artifacts.

standard setting for flash, 1/60th

Again Peer, maybe do a quick check to see if your lens' IS is functioning ok. What most experience is a world of difference with handheld / shoulder mounted shots taken with or without IS. I currently have a 17-55 in for repair (expensive repair!) as the IS stopped working, quite a common complaint apparently.

Hate to throw myself into this slightly contentious discussion, but shooting tight closeups as a B camera on a 2nd gen. 70-200, I found that I got better results with the IS engaged. I was doing one of those slow drifting-around type of closeups where the camera is constantly in motion.

Even though I was using a top-notch head, I found just enough of my "humanity" showing up in the shot (heartbeat, hand jitter on the panhandle etc) that I had to work really hard to avoid this. During a card change I flipped on the stabilizer and everything got REALLY easy. I never felt like the IS was fighting me or overshooting.

If you can't tell a difference between IS an no IS at 200mm handheld, one of three things is possible:
1) your IS was off or broken both times
2) your IS was ON both times
3) you have the arms of Hercules himself, rock solid like chiseled marble.

Because *I* can tell the difference between IS on and off handheld, and its a big difference. With IS off, tripod mounted, I can tell when my hand touches the tripod handle. So if you can hand hold it and not tell between on and off, then it has to be one of the above 3.


And what you need Peer... is to be A TOUCH LESS RUDE please..

Read my post one more time.
I wasn't saying you shot on a tripod... I was pointing out that SOMEONE WHO IS NOT YOU should not need IS if they are shooting interviews on a tripod at 200mm.

My point, one more time, is that some shooters will never need IS, whereas some will live and die by it, and that what's good for Peer Landa is not necessarily good for every other shooter out there. IS is not a myth as you believe... IS has saved my ass and made my shot on numerous occasions. And I'm not the only one, as you can read by other's posts as well.

Again, I'll rehash my previous post, hopefully a bit less rude this time: I would appreciate if you, Dylan, would try to read my posts more thoroughly before replying, (as my mom always told me, being perceptive is the key to success):

Please tell me, where have I said "at 200mm"...?

-- peer