To IS or not. (1 Viewer)

Hi all

I`m thinking of getting the Canon EF 300mm F4L the question is which one the IS version or the non IS one?I say this because i`ve heard the IS one isn`t quite so sharp or contrasty as the non IS due to more elements.I use a tripod most of the time anyway both these lenses are available 2nd hand for a good price I just don`t want to splash the cash & regret it.

Steve.

Steve

Yes I would agree the non-IS is a tad sharper and possible focuses a bit quicker.

I had one for 6 months, a great lens until I droped it a few feet off the tripod. No external damage but the glass AF grating broke. The replacement AF units are impossible to get in Europe and Canon no longer supply. So the lens is a write off and I had no insurance.

Hence I replaced with an IS version. There are a few times I wish I had the non-IS version but I have started to make use of the IS lately. I've manage to get some decent shots at 1/100 sec. However I find that IS is not bullet proof and does not guarantee good results at these speeds.

stevo said:

Hi all

I`m thinking of getting the Canon EF 300mm F4L the question is which one the IS version or the non IS one?I say this because i`ve heard the IS one isn`t quite so sharp or contrasty as the non IS due to more elements.I use a tripod most of the time anyway both these lenses are available 2nd hand for a good price I just don`t want to splash the cash & regret it.

Steve.

Click to expand...

If you will be doing mostly (almost entirely) tripod mounted shots, there is no reason to even consider the IS version. But I do highly recommend IS on any lens if you will be handholding. Any possible trade-off (real or imagined) in sharpness or contrast is far outweighed by the benefits of IS. If you have never used a lens with IS, rent or borrow any model and try it with the IS on and with it off. You will be convinced.

Thanks

Steve.