Thinking of Switching to the "Dark Side"

S

Skeleton1200

Suspended / Banned
Messages
135
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
Afternoon all,

I am thinking of switching over to the "Dark Side" that is Canon, :lol:

I am moving across from Sony which has SSS in body, compared to Canon that have the IS in lens.

My long winded question is thus, Would I require IS in all my lenses or only lens over a certain focal length?

Another reason for asking this is because I am looking to get a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 Di LD SP AF IF lens circa £600.

Any help or advice would be welcome.

Many thanks

Andy
 
everyone knows the dark side is the switch from canon to nikon. You are moving into the light side of the force!
 
Depends what your photographing?. Static subjects and/or failing light, IS comes into its own giving you that 2-3 f stops of play. For action photography, sports, aviation, motorsport, not really needed, although people still have it switch on no matter what they're doing.

Would you require it in all your lenses, probably not, nice to have, but not essential, depends what you want to photograph.

review on tamron 70-200mm f2.8
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_70-200_2p8_c16/
 
joescrivens said:
everyone knows the dark side is the switch from canon to nikon. You are moving into the light side of the force!
Click to expand...

:agree:

Join the light side, its quite nice over here. The grass is always green, and we have cookies! :D
 
The true Dark Side is Nikon:)

As to IS, depends what you shoot and how you shoot it. I've listed a few points, hope it helps:

IS is certainly useful when using certain focal lengths eg 400mm but can be handy at any depending on what you are doing.

Generally I'd say I'm not that bothered whether it has it or not with focal lengths below 100mm

If you mainly use a tripod then it's not really a consideration.

General rule is your shutter speed should be greater than 1/focal length to avoid camera shake so using a 400mm lens without IS doesn't need to be an issue.

At the end of they day, we got buy without it on SLR's and Nikon just realsed their new 85mm lens without it so I wouldn't view it as a necessity. Also, both Canon and Nikons 24-70 lenses were released when IS was around and they left it out.

Owning the right brand is much more important:lol:
 
It's easy really.

Canon owners like white stuff and whining = Luke Skywalker.

Nikon owners like black and are always quietly malevolent = Darth Vader.

:lol:
 
The real Dark side has Fresh coffee and home made cookies, Cakes on a friday..lol (sorry)
 
Andy, why? What do you expect to gain?

I ask because one of the few cameras I lust after is the A900 and having in body IS is a dream to me as I'm a Canon user.

Anyway back to the question, I'd say that all lenses can benefit from IS in some circumstances and the beauty of in body IS is that they do whereas with Canon there simply are no IS lenses at some lengths.

All in all, I think you're mad but it's your choice :bonk: :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top