01-11-2012, 10:24 AM
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1326221788' post='14684']
Thats not esoteric, its pretty practical. To be honest ultra high iso and IS are only useful in ver specific circumstances which in my area (travel photograph) dont occur very often.
For once IS does not carry any advantage at shor focal length . I can hold 1/6 of a second at 24mm with my 24-105. IS gives practically zero improvement here and anything longer than 1/6 sec comes out blurred whether I use IS or not. In addition I quite often need much longer times than 1/6s to blur movements. Actually, only since I own IS lenses I started carrying a tripod.
Things are much different at the tele end if course.But since IS only works for static subjects and I mostly shoot people with my 70-200, I have to get sufficently short shutter speeds anyway. IS does help a lot in keeping the viewfinder steady and allows for quicker composition with tele lenses though.[/quote]
IS also works well when panning.
I don't agree with you. Try shooting in fairly dark places. I often get in situations where F/1.4 or F/1.2 and 3200 iso is not always enough to take a picture without movement blur, in which cases I either use even higher isos, or underexpose a few stops and fix in PP later. Depends a bit on the camera I am using as well <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.
IMO, for low light photography (of non-static subjects) one has never enough light gathering abililty... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />
As with all these things, IS and high iso, plus large apertures, it really all depends on one's preferences, needs, shooting styles and limitations. There is therefore a place for all of these technologies. Personally, I have quite steady hands, so I don't really need IS for the subjects I shoot below, let's say, 200 mm, but above that FL, it is really great.to have.
kind regards, Wim
Thats not esoteric, its pretty practical. To be honest ultra high iso and IS are only useful in ver specific circumstances which in my area (travel photograph) dont occur very often.
For once IS does not carry any advantage at shor focal length . I can hold 1/6 of a second at 24mm with my 24-105. IS gives practically zero improvement here and anything longer than 1/6 sec comes out blurred whether I use IS or not. In addition I quite often need much longer times than 1/6s to blur movements. Actually, only since I own IS lenses I started carrying a tripod.
Things are much different at the tele end if course.But since IS only works for static subjects and I mostly shoot people with my 70-200, I have to get sufficently short shutter speeds anyway. IS does help a lot in keeping the viewfinder steady and allows for quicker composition with tele lenses though.[/quote]
IS also works well when panning.
Quote:Regarding ISO, somehing in the range of 800-3200 coupled with a fast prime lens gives much more pleasing results during street shooting than a slower lens and higher ISO. I think anything over iso 3200 is only needed by people who desperatly need very fast shutterspeeds in low light eg. sports and wildlife photographers. For everybody else the current technologies is already overkill.
I don't agree with you. Try shooting in fairly dark places. I often get in situations where F/1.4 or F/1.2 and 3200 iso is not always enough to take a picture without movement blur, in which cases I either use even higher isos, or underexpose a few stops and fix in PP later. Depends a bit on the camera I am using as well <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.IMO, for low light photography (of non-static subjects) one has never enough light gathering abililty... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />As with all these things, IS and high iso, plus large apertures, it really all depends on one's preferences, needs, shooting styles and limitations. There is therefore a place for all of these technologies. Personally, I have quite steady hands, so I don't really need IS for the subjects I shoot below, let's say, 200 mm, but above that FL, it is really great.to have.
kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....