Fast Lens vs. Image Stabilizer

[mclanz]

Nakasubok ako ng IS kahapon sa putowurld. mapapa-wow ka talaga lalo na kung gaya ko na nasobrahan sa kaka-kape.

Pero gaya ni sabi pubert, pag walang IS, may remedyo. tri/monopod, beanbag, poste, lamesa etc.

pag hangang F4 ka lang, di ko alam kung ano ang remedyo.

• Tweet

[scuba_holic]

I think the original question should be stated as...


Fast prime lens (ex. 50mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8 )

versus

Image stabilizer/VR/OS lens with standard aperture openings. (ex.  EF-S 17-85 f4-5.6 is usm, Nikkor f/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR, Sigma's 18-200 f3.5-6.3 dc os, all set at either 50mm or 85mm with IS/VR/OS enabled)


Tama ba, scuba-holic? 

Hi Panaderos,

Bingo! That is exactly what I was trying to compare.  Sorry, I couldn't get my thoughts together for that one.

Let me see if I got this correct.  A lens with I.S. is good a reducing camera shake but it's not good for stopping motion.  While a fast lens allows you to shoot using a faster shutter speed which would be good at stopping motion thus rendering camera shakes unnoticeable.

• Tweet

[beethoven]

Nakasubok ako ng IS kahapon sa putowurld. mapapa-wow ka talaga lalo na kung gaya ko na nasobrahan sa kaka-kape.

Pero gaya ni sabi pubert, pag walang IS, may remedyo. tri/monopod, beanbag, poste, lamesa etc.

pag hangang F4 ka lang, di ko alam kung ano ang remedyo.

remedyo ko sa f/4 lang na lens ko...  flash

• Tweet

[pubert]

A lens with I.S. is good a reducing camera shake but it's not good for stopping motion.  

not neccessarily sir, meron din mga lens na may IS na tapus relatively fast din like the 17-55IS f/2.8 and the 70-200 IS L f/2.8 -ideal na sana since you get both the large aperture and IS pero syempre lahat may trade-off... in this case yung price 

• Tweet

[ice_man]

For me it still depends what you shoot pa rin. I have only one lens which has the IS, 24-105 and it's a great performer. It does really help in reducing camera shake, naduduling nga ako sa kakatingin sa viewfinder then gumana yung IS..hehehe 

But having a large opening gives me the color or mood that I usually want to capture. Iba pa rin ang large openings.

For my walkaround, IS will do.. 

• Tweet

[sixpack]

pag hangang F4 ka lang, di ko alam kung ano ang remedyo.

Babaan mo shutter speed tapos on mo ang IS.

• Tweet

[Rey Nocum]

pag hangang F4 ka lang, di ko alam kung ano ang remedyo.

My first remedy ISO 400 to 800 and steadier hand.
Second, monopod/tripod.

My first walk around lens had an IS up to 3 stops. I thought I could not live without IS but when non of my lenses now has a stabilizer and I don't miss it at all.

• Tweet

[thealbai]

This thread contains sample pics of the 17-55 f2.8 IS.  Fast lens + IS!  Best of both worlds but like the other posts mentioned...  downside is price.

http://www.pinoyphotography.org/forum/index.php?topic=4754.0

• Tweet

[mckytm]

Sorry, I've seen various answers to the question, but the poster never told us -- what does he need the lens for? 

If it's for shooting sports (where stopping motion is important) or for natural low-light photography, then go for the fast lens.

If it's for convenience, then get a zoom with IS.

If it's to eliminate camera shake, then get a tripod.

You'll get different answers depending on your needs... so, what do you want to do with the lens?

• Tweet

[scuba_holic]

Hi mckytm

Actually, I was looking for an all around lens.  But I guess I would be using it mostly for photographing my kids. And using it indoors with low-light to bad-lighting situations.  With these criteria and based on the feedback, I guess a faster lens would be the most appropriate acquisition.

Thanks guys for the comments!

• Tweet

[athlonxp3200]

i also would say Image Stabilizers will be better at reducing camera shake, for still subjects.  i believe shooting moving objects is a different story anyway

i had a 50mm f/1.8 and used it to shoot a group picture in a mall; even at f/1.8 i got 1/30s or so shutter speed (which is insufficient to meet the 1/fstop rule-of-thumb as mentioned).  and the depth-of-field is also too shallow - one face is in focus, the other two is blurred

having two faces not focused is not probably because of camera shake but because of the shallow depth of field you have when you used an aperture of F/1.8

• Tweet

[athlonxp3200]

Hi mckytm

Actually, I was looking for an all around lens.  But I guess I would be using it mostly for photographing my kids. And using it indoors with low-light to bad-lighting situations.  With these criteria and based on the feedback, I guess a faster lens would be the most appropriate acquisition.

Thanks guys for the comments!

how about getting a flash?

• Tweet

[beethoven]

having two faces not focused is not probably because of camera shake but because of the shallow depth of field you have when you used an aperture of F/1.8

right, that's what i was actually trying to point out - even when i can go fast with f/1.8 it will result to shallow depth of field which we might not want at all when shooting portraits or a group of people.  so i'd go for IS than a fast non-IS lens

• Tweet

[HartSord]

how about getting a flash?

I second the motion!  For shooting kids, using a large aperture with a fast lens will give you a very shallow DOF and you might have difficulty tracking a moving kid.  IS will not help with a moving target either.  A flash however, will freeze motion and allow you to use a smaller aperture for deeper DOF.

• Tweet

[finepix]

Semi-OT

Guys, newbie here. Questions:

Comparing 55-200mm 4-5.6G & 18-200mm 3.5-5.6G,

1) are "4-5.6" & "3.5-5.6" aperture numbers? does it mean that, for 55-200mm, at 55 maximum opening is 4 & at 200 it is 5.6?

2) how can a 55-200mm 4-5.6G (set at 200mm) achieve a similar result against a 200mm 2.8 or 50mm 1.8D (both at ISO200)? is it by increasing ISO to 1600? 800? am asking this as I know AF-S DX 55-200mm 4-5.6G ED is not ideal under low-light conditions (concert, indoor gyms, etc.). I'm thinking that the only way I could freeze the action under these lighting conditions is by increasing ISO to 800 or 1600 or perhaps 3200.

Thanks!

• Tweet

[ferrarista44]

@finepix- increasing the ISO or using a flash would help. but i'm not really sure how fast, in terms of shutter speed, you can get with f/5.6 at ISO3200 or ISO1600 using ambient light. besides, noise kicks in.

• Tweet

[beethoven]

...
Comparing 55-200mm 4-5.6G & 18-200mm 3.5-5.6G,

1) are "4-5.6" & "3.5-5.6" aperture numbers? does it mean that, for 55-200mm, at 55 maximum opening is 4 & at 200 it is 5.6?

...

yes that is correct   it's called (or what i remember) "variable aperture" lens.  the largest aperture it's capable of becomes smaller as the lens focal length increases.

• Tweet

[panaderos]

having two faces not focused is not probably because of camera shake but because of the shallow depth of field you have when you used an aperture of F/1.8

True.  I usually use my 50mm set at f1.8 only for one-person portrait.  Great for stopping motion too!  Has very shallow DOF, which is what I'm targetting.  For a 2-person portrait, I'll set the opening to F2.8 which usually captures a sharp picture of both person too... as long as I don't foot zoom-in too close... and they don't stand too far apart.  Can also stop motion.  For 3 or more persons, that is a group shot picture already.  I'll set it at least F3.5 to F11.  BUT I'll be using the flash too.  I've read on the internet that using the Flash is most advisable in group pictures indoor setup.  People rarely stand still.    

Having an F1.8 aperture (fast) lens offers great flexibility, imho.

• Tweet

[kengo]

2) how can a 55-200mm 4-5.6G (set at 200mm) achieve a similar result against a 200mm 2.8 or 50mm 1.8D (both at ISO200)? is it by increasing ISO to 1600? 800?

F5.6 ISO 800 = F2.8 ISO 200
F4 ISO 1000 = F1.8 ISO 200

These values will give you similar exposure value, but image will differ in Depth of Field.

• Tweet