SubliminalThought
Senior Member
Agreed, and some people (ala snapshot masses who migrate to dSLR) don't know better ... and that is why its there.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What is the ultimate French toast topping?
Canon Custom Modes Tip
- Thread starter fwwwn
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon custom mode
Agreed, and some people (ala snapshot masses who migrate to dSLR) don't know better ... and that is why its there.
Moklet Kcuf
Senior Member
IS is useful. Like already said, it's primary benefit comes into play with long lenses. A large proportion of amazing sports and wildlife images you see these days would have utilized IS.
I agree that finer glass is always favourable over IS. For instance, if doing a wedding, a 24-70 2.8 will always be 1st choice over my 24-105 IS 4, instead the 24-105 will still work a charm on a second camera.
With IS technology improving, like Canon's new Hybrid IS system (compensates for both shift and angular movement). There's a whole bunch of better performing lenses around the corner.
Like the new Canon 100mm f2.8L Macro IS. Yes very Please!!!
ldmelsa
Executive Member
I think I see plenty of mistakes and misconception in this thread. Misconceptions based on lack of experience with these different systems. These include; how Canon and Nikon's jpg processing differs, how Canon and Nikon's implementation of autoISO differs and when to use IS/VR and why.
I feel that these are beyond the scope of an Internet forum. You have to use all these system to get it.
I feel that these are beyond the scope of an Internet forum. You have to use all these system to get it.
Moklet Kcuf
Senior Member
Yes it's a multi topical thread. But although technical, the fundamentals of these topics are not hard to understand and not necessarily different according to Camera brand.
JPEG Processing - Camera captures raw data on sensor - converts optimal interpretation into compressed JPEG image
Auto ISO - Camera chooses lowest suitable ISO (for least noise), according to light availabilty.
Image Stabilizers - fairly self explanatory, whether in-lens or in-camera, it reduces blur from camera shake.
IS, When to use and why? - Camera blur comes from slow shutter speed which becomes more evident shooting at longer focal lengths. Image Stabilisation can compensate for a camera/lens' limitations. The list of reasons why are numerous and already in discussion....
Last edited:
Yep. TBH I've always had to weigh up the costs involved and spending on faster glass has always won out - with the exception of my long Sigma with its OS.
I've only referred to using Canon implementations in this, a canon-centric thread, as that's all I've had a real working experience with. I'm perfectly willing to confine my comments to Canon and leave Nikon to you. Well, maybe except when it comes to JPG which is pretty generic
Too bad. I've always thought expressing views and reading other peoples perspectives is what an internet forum is all about.
If people are happy living inside the green box then that's cool.
Last edited:
There. Fixed it for you.
Why? An Internet forum is about sharing information and experiences
Moklet Kcuf
Senior Member
Lets not jump the gun, IS is a performance function, not compensation for a photographer with parkinsons disease.
You tell a pro wildlife photographer to turn off his IS in the early light, he'd scorn hot chips at you.
Sure, IS is on consumer level cameras to help improve upon average lens quality. But what's wrong with that?
If it means you get an extra theoretical Stop from a Camera/Lens' limitations, it's great IMO.
Image blur is not a limitation of the camera nor the lens, it is caused by the photographer.
IS cannot improve the lens quality - it may improve the image quality, but not the lens. The glass in the lens determines the lens quality.
For the record, I know wildlife photographers who scorn the use of IS...
ISO 1600, 1/125s, F/5.6, 500mm
ISO 3200, 1/250s, F/6.3, 300mmkoffiejunkie
Executive Member
Doesn't that come down to the same thing? This is a bit of a debate over semantics as far as I'm concerned. I want a mode where I control shutter and aperture, and the camera does the rest. Not does the rest within some arbitrary limit imposed by the manufacturer who have no idea what I'm going to be shooting. Weather we call it Sv or M+AutoISO or something else, I don't care.
Lets agree to disagree on that. Aperture, to my eyes, has a much bigger influence on the content of the final image. What's in focus, what isn't. What's blurred and by how much. Mood, feel, etc. Besides, I'd much rather spend time doing PP on an excessively noisy image (something I can fix) than be stuck with an image that doesn't have all the important bits in focus because my camera went for a smaller aperture rather than bumping the sensitivity.
Just out of interest, which feature of the 24-70L sways you here? The (reported, I don't have experience with lens) better colour/contrast, or the f/2.8?
Sorry, Moklet, not picking on you
I think the one thing that's been missed so far is this: high and/or auto ISO and IS/OS/VR/VC are tools to aid us. Being religious about using or not using either serves no purpose at all.
I've said this before, and I'll said it again. I have shots that I would not not have gotten if it wasn't for IS. Like with Auto ISO, for the vast majority of the time, I don't need it. But I leave it on - it doesn't hurt my images in any way. Sure, I have gotten steady shots without IS (on my 10-20 and 50mm lenses, for example) at 1/4 and 1/2 (and even one at 1s), but I view those as lucky shots and don't rely on being able to pull that off at the drop of a hat. But with IS on I can almost always get shots at 1/4 (at least with the 24-105L I used to, the IS on 18-200 isn't anywhere as good in the same focal range).
The same goes for high ISO. I have hundreds of shots taken at 1600 or higher that I would have missed if I had stubbornly stuck to a lower sensitivity.
Faster glass isn't always the sliver bullet. It's of no use when whatever you're shooting doesn't fit into the paper thin DOF. A lot of my event shots are at between f/4 and f/6.3, because that's what I need to fit my subject in. In those cases the 24-105L always gave me better results simply because it could focus in light levels where my 50mm f/1.8 just hunts.
One last thought. This shot was taken from a moving boat. Without IS and high ISO (1600 in this case) there is no way I would have gotten this shot. When I'm 80 and my hands shake too much to hold my camera, and I look back at images like these, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to worry about what ISO this was shot at or weather or not I used IS and the £200 it added the price of my lens.
ldmelsa
Executive Member
koffiejunkie is very sensible and practical
good post
good post
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
I'm feeling lazy - too lazy to go back and check - but has anyone disputed that improved sensor sensitivity (high ISO) is a good thing?
no, not directly, but what other reason than fear of high ISO would there be to avoid auto-iso?
BigAl just presses the ISO button and changes it as shown in the pics above - don't need the camera to decide
Moklet Kcuf
Senior Member
I never said it was a limitation of the camera, I said motion blur was because of shutter speed being too slow. It's not that I'm saying a photographer can't be the fault for this. There are however numerous situations where a photographer risks unwanted motion blur through no fault of their own. So no, motion blur is not by default, the fault of the photographer. Agreed?
Thanks, you have convoluted my words for arguments sake and came back to what I obviously meant
So do I at times, oscillations from a Canon stabilizer can potentially create blur itself. But I don't dismiss it wholesale. Under appropriate circumstances it is without argument, able to improve the quality of an image, sometimes dramatically. People can scorn that fact to their grave if they like.
Nice results. If you shot the Owl hand-held you deserve a medal! Did you try catching it in flight at that shutter speed?
I see the usefulness you are seeking. Canon unfortunately has you stuck out in the cold. Did you know the 1DIII doesn't even have Auto ISOl? I suppose it all comes down to user demand.
Personally I would really liked geo-tagging in my 1D and 5D, but I'm not losing any sleep.
Generally we all want faster lenses, so yes f2.8 is preferred over f4.0IS. The bokeh at 2.8 for portraits and and slightly better contrast are definite positives too. But really, if shooting above f4, I find the differences between them are miniscule.
If I may offer a critical observation. This image is correctly exposed according to the lights and reflections, requiring a relatively short exposure that can often be taken handheld. On the other hand, camera meters are notorious for becoming confused with these type of high contrast scenes. very often overexposing by trying instead to meter for the black areas, blowing your exposure time to seconds. A perfect candidate for switching to Manual, I say.One last thought. This shot was taken from a moving boat. Without IS and high ISO (1600 in this case) there is no way I would have gotten this shot.
I'm with you on this oneBigAl just presses the ISO button and changes it as shown in the pics above - don't need the camera to decide
ldmelsa
Executive Member
Moklet, where is your Flickr?
You need to go over to this thread: http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=135815
and create an account.
It is required on MyBB
You need to go over to this thread: http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=135815
and create an account.
It is required on MyBB
Moklet Kcuf
Senior Member
Ok Sure, I can be a sucker for that rule
I will create an anonymous one when I get a chance. PM me if you'd like a to see some of my online pics in the meantime.
I will create an anonymous one when I get a chance. PM me if you'd like a to see some of my online pics in the meantime.
koffiejunkie
Executive Member
Very true. But see, this is where my argument about tools that aid us comes into play. Exposure Bias is the perfect tool for the job. Something to be said for knowing how your lightmeter is likely to react too.
This shot was at -1.0ev, f/4, 1/13s, ISO1600, Av mode. And did I mention it was shot from a moving boat?
Moklet Kcuf
Senior Member
I would disagree that Exposure Bias is perfect for the job. You're depending on your camera meter to find a relative exposure, each time you move the camera even slightly you risk changing the meter reading, no matter what Metering Mode you're in. So how are you ever going to 'know' when your camera has got it 100% right?
Whereas, if shooting Manual, you would meter the scene using one of a number of basic techniques to find a fixed correct exposure. That way you can re-frame the camera in any direction with the secure knowledge that so as long as the lighting conditions of the subject remain the same, the exposure wil remain correct too.