do image stabilisers decrease image quality?

[rhysgray]

it seems all of canons sharpest lenses have no IS.
is this co-incidence or is it because the addition of an IS system somehow negatively affects image quality??

[rhysgray]

everybody knows the advantages of an IS system but are there any disadvantages other than size weight and price???

[Narcolepsy]

EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II
Image Stabilization & a very sharp lens

[neuroanatomist]

EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II
Image Stabilization & a very sharp lens

300/400/500/600 II superteles.  Image Stabilization & even sharper.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

it seems all of canons sharpest lenses have no IS.
is this co-incidence or is it because the addition of an IS system somehow negatively affects image quality? ?

I do not believe that is accurate.  The newest lenses are the sharpest, and most have IS.  They have a more complex optical formula, and cost more as well. So what is true, is that newer lenses are sharpest, and prime lenses of the same generation and price range are usually sharper than a zoom. 
 
 

[Daniel Flather]

EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II
Image Stabilization & a very sharp lens

300/400/500/600 II superteles.  Image Stabilization & even sharper.

What, no love for the 200/2IS? The sharpest of them all.

[PackLight]

Yes they do decrease IQ. If you don't believe me start shooting with yours turned off when you are doing hand held shooting and see how much your pictures improve.

[tnargs]

Yes they do decrease IQ. If you don't believe me start shooting with yours turned off when you are doing hand held shooting and see how much your pictures improve.

That's not what the OP is asking. He is asking about a lens with no IS vs a lens with IS.

The most sensible way to discuss is to compare say Canon lenses where the same optical model is available (at the same time) with or without IS.

Canon probably publish MTF curves for both models and this might be a good starting point.

[PackLight]

Yes they do decrease IQ. If you don't believe me start shooting with yours turned off when you are doing hand held shooting and see how much your pictures improve.

That's not what the OP is asking. He is asking about a lens with no IS vs a lens with IS.

The most sensible way to discuss is to compare say Canon lenses where the same optical model is available (at the same time) with or without IS.

Canon probably publish MTF curves for both models and this might be a good starting point.

That is not what the question posed in the "Subject" line says, sorry I didn't answer both of his questions.

As for his second question the OP posed in the thread, the IS was left out of the 24-70mm II for weight and size reasons. Compare the MTF chart of the 24-70mm II to the new 24-70mm f/4 IS at 70mm. The f/4 wins.

[PavelR]

EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II
Image Stabilization & a very sharp lens

300/400/500/600 II superteles.  Image Stabilization & even sharper.

What, no love for the 200/2IS? The sharpest of them all.

+1

[neuroanatomist]

The most sensible way to discuss is to compare say Canon lenses where the same optical model is available (at the same time) with or without IS.

Nice, in theory.  But in practice, the addition of IS changes the optical formula and the other elements need to be changed in concert, so there's no real direct comparison.

But it's likely easiest to make a general comparison with the 70-200mm zooms.  In descending order of from sharpest to least sharp, they are:

• 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
• 70-200mm f/4L IS
• 70-200mm f/2.8L
• 70-200mm f/2.8L IS
• 70-200mm f/4L

The fact that two IS lenses are at the top argues that IS doens't need to result in a loss of IQ...but those two lenses are also the newset in the bunch, and Mt. Spokane's point about newer lenses being sharper is true.

What, no love for the 200/2IS? The sharpest of them all.

The 200/2L IS is quite sharp, but the 300/2.8L IS II is sharper away from the center, as is the 500 II.  But probably not a significant difference overall - they're all damn sharp!

[weixing]

Hi,
    IMHO, every element added will decrease IQ by a bit, so a lens without IS will have slightly better IQ than lens with IS (when both lens are from the same generation and same grade) under perfect shooting condition. The decrease of IQ is minimum using modern coating and lens manufacturing technology, so the advantage of IS outweigh the decrease in IQ.

    So the question is: do you want some of your images to be very sharp (no IS) or most of your images to be sharp (with IS)? I think most of us would prefer the IS.

    Have a nice day.

[wickidwombat]

EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II
Image Stabilization & a very sharp lens

300/400/500/600 II superteles.  Image Stabilization & even sharper.

i can't believe you missed the 200 f2L IS! 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Hi,
    IMHO, every element added will decrease IQ by a bit, so a lens without IS will have slightly better IQ than lens with IS (when both lens are from the same generation and same grade) under perfect shooting condition.

So you believe a lens with one element is sharpest?  Maybe one with no elements is the ultimate?

[PackLight]

Hi,
    IMHO, every element added will decrease IQ by a bit, so a lens without IS will have slightly better IQ than lens with IS (when both lens are from the same generation and same grade) under perfect shooting condition.

So you believe a lens with one element is sharpest?  Maybe one with no elements is the ultimate?

That would be so. Looking through a hollow tube will always give you the clearest sharpest image. You can not improve the light when it is in it's near perfect unrestricted form.