December 18, 2017, 04:03:23 PM

Author Topic: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]  (Read 19025 times)

Lee Jay

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2028
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #75 on: November 06, 2017, 09:38:13 AM »
A few of months  ago I was describing this to a Canon Rep at a local photography show and, frankly he thought I was mental - but he was very polite.

I'm with him.

I've tested this extensively and shots I can't get *at all* without IS often become tack-sharp with IS.

I only have one demo handy, but here you go.


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #75 on: November 06, 2017, 09:38:13 AM »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3256
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #76 on: November 07, 2017, 09:40:05 AM »
I took advantage of the IS even on the older 24-105 f4L (version 1).

That way I was able to shoot with lower speeds and bring the ISO to more realistic numbers.

I am talking about static subjects (museums and churches interiors).

So I definitely prefer IS.  Also my 500 4L IS II works excellently with IS set to ON.
I also observed IS on my 70-200 lenses (2.8L IS II and 4L IS) The advantages were very obvious.

I would love to have a 24-70 2.8L IS with IQ similar to my 24-70 2.8 II.

There only one different case where the absence of IS was beneficial but I am talking about something completely different now: NOT an IS lens with IS set to OFF but a version of a lens without IS vs the same with IS.

I am referring to the very old EF 300mm f 4L (NON IS as I said previously). That lens is reported as being better than its IS counterpart.

I don't/didn't have both lenses to make comparisons but I have made the following comparisons using tripod and live view manual focusing:

1. 300mm f/4 L NON IS + 1.4X II
2. 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS (version 1)

The test case 1 result was a little better. Should the lens was a 300 f/4L IS the results would be the oposite as had been reported consistently by many sources in the past.

So I can safely assume that the non IS model is sharper.

The above of course refers to the past and to a case where the lens does not include IS vs to a lens with IS set to off.

Now back on topic a question for the 2.8 II users: Should an EF24-70 2.8L IS come to existence would you sell your beloved copy?   :)

johnf3f

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 831
  • Canon 1Dx
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #77 on: November 07, 2017, 03:59:43 PM »
A few of months  ago I was describing this to a Canon Rep at a local photography show and, frankly he thought I was mental - but he was very polite.

I'm with him.

I've tested this extensively and shots I can't get *at all* without IS often become tack-sharp with IS.

I only have one demo handy, but here you go.



So that means that you agree with me - after all he (the Canon Rep) did! Much to his surprise :)
Canon 1DX, 7D2, 16-35 F4 L IS, 24-70 F2.8 V2, 100 F2.8 Macro, 100-400 L IS Mk2, 300 F2.8 L IS, 800 F5.6 L IS, Holga Pinhole lens.

yeahright

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 20
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #78 on: November 08, 2017, 01:27:43 AM »
A few of months  ago I was describing this to a Canon Rep at a local photography show and, frankly he thought I was mental - but he was very polite.

I'm with him.

I've tested this extensively and shots I can't get *at all* without IS often become tack-sharp with IS.

I only have one demo handy, but here you go.



So that means that you agree with me - after all he (the Canon Rep) did! Much to his surprise :)
From how I read this post it does NOT back your argument, on the contrary. You brought up the example of 800mm and 1/160 s earlier. Maybe in this example you are right, if you have a steady hand. But are you seriously saying IS would not help you for stationary subjects in dim lighting handheld at 1/4 s or 1/2 s? Or would you say: "Under such conditions I wouldn't take the photo anyway, because even if it may turn out better with IS than without (possibly even significantly), it will still never reach my high standards of tack sharp images."

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3256
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #79 on: November 08, 2017, 07:26:27 AM »
I believe it is safe to assume that in these times the modern Canon lenses are not degraded by the mere presense of IS elements. So it is better to have IS and its ON/OFF switch rather than not.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2017, 05:39:29 AM by tron »

johnf3f

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 831
  • Canon 1Dx
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #80 on: November 08, 2017, 04:48:05 PM »
Whilst I wouldn't pretend to be able to hand hold most (if any) of my lenses at 1/2 sec I do not encounter the need to do this. Whilst I do like interior shots of Norman churches I have yet to find the need for IS.

My main gripe with IS is the way that it mucks up AF (especially tracking) and that the IS elements never seem to settle back in the same place when IS is off - can't be a good thing. Additionally it is of little (any) help on static subjects with long lenses and, so far, has no use on short lenses that I have (yet) found.

So I don't want to pay for a "Feature" that makes my lenses larger, heavier, more expensive and makes it more difficult to get the shots that I want - I am a bit funny that way ;)

I don't do "People" photography but I do dabble with most genres (my main interest is wildlife) and in the last 3 years and 11 months I have found no need for IS and have benefited from a higher (very much higher on wildlife) keeper rate. Best upgrade I ever made to my photography and it was free!

Agree or disagree - it is of little concern to me however if you ever visit the South Wales area I am happy, in the spirit of helping others, to demonstrate the advantages of the Off switch.

All the best.
Canon 1DX, 7D2, 16-35 F4 L IS, 24-70 F2.8 V2, 100 F2.8 Macro, 100-400 L IS Mk2, 300 F2.8 L IS, 800 F5.6 L IS, Holga Pinhole lens.

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5864
  • USM > STM
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #81 on: November 08, 2017, 05:02:16 PM »
I believe it is safe to assume that in these times the modern Canon lenses are not degraded by the mere presense of IS elements. So it is better to have IS and it's ON/OFF switch rather than not.

I agree in principle (I also love IS and generally am not a skeptic) but don't we lack the apples to apples comparison to make that statement?

What I mean is:  IS and non-IS lenses rarely come out simultaneously, so they often are slightly different optically as time goes on.

For instance, look at the 70-200 lenses -- the closest IS vs. non-IS physical constructs that I know of:

70-200 f/4L = 1999
70-200 f/4L IS = 2006

70-200 f/2.8L = 1995
70-200 f/2.8L IS = 2001
70-200 f/2.8L IS II = 2010

What I don't know is if these two families of lenses are identical from an optical design standpoint or if they are different.  If they are different, we can't really use them as the basis of stating IS has no effect, correct?

Help me out gang, are there any IS and non-IS lenses that are identical otherwise out there?

- A

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #81 on: November 08, 2017, 05:02:16 PM »

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5864
  • USM > STM
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #82 on: November 08, 2017, 05:04:54 PM »
Just checked at TDP -- both families above have different numbers of elements/groups from each other, so those two families are out for a 'clean' IS vs. no IS comparison.

- A

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3256
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #83 on: November 08, 2017, 07:52:24 PM »
I believe there is no identical pair. So the only possible comparison is an apple to oranges one.

300mm f/4L > 300mm f/4L IS

70-200 f/2.8L IS II > 70-200 2.8L > 70-200 2.8L IS

70-200 4L IS > 70-200 4L

Quite apple to oranges so I put the above merely for fun.

The closest comparison is the one with the switch ON and OFF on the same lens.

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3256
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #84 on: November 08, 2017, 07:55:06 PM »
As far the interior of churches and museums I have found IS to be of great help especially at normal and at above normal focal lengths (50mm-105mm)...

Sharlin

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #85 on: November 09, 2017, 09:09:04 AM »
You can't really use the same optical design for IS and non-IS because you need the IS group... Can't just take a non-IS lens and add IS to one of the groups. Not in general anyway.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Still in Testing [CR2]
« Reply #85 on: November 09, 2017, 09:09:04 AM »