CANON 450D kit - image stabilizer question

zzzLazyDaisy

Hi, apologies if this has been covered before - I did a search but couldn't find anything.

I am looking at getting a canon 450D kit which includes an IS lens.

But i am a bit confused by the image stabilizer as it seems to be in the lens on canons, and in the body on some other makes.

Is there any benefit or disadvantage of one over the other, or does it just come down to a question of personal choice?

I have a panasonic fz18 at the moment and really like the IS feature as I take lots of nature photos, so this is a feature that I do want.

Any help/input appreciated.

Thanks

Daisy

trcooke

I don't think it makes much of a difference whether the IS is on the lens or the camera. It's just one of those things that different manufacturers do it differently.

I have recently bought this kit myself and would highly recommend it.

isofa

You'll get people arguing for both camps, most professional quality equipment I use and come across uses the "in lens" systems, most employ a a gyroscopic type system.

One of my Canon Pro L series lenses has IS (similar type to the one you mention). It is amazing when you turn it on and see the effect through the lens. And for certain shots it can make a difference, but importantly you can also turn it off when required.
As it's an SLR you are seeing the direct effect through the lens too.

Obviously cameras which have it on the body can use cheaper non-IS lenses and still have stabilisation options.

However, IS isn't the be all and end all though, remember it doesn't freeze moment of a subject, so even if it allows you a couple of stops extra in lower light / a slower shutter, the picture will still be blurry if the subject is moving. Many people don't realise this who buy IS!

I use it mainly in low light situations, where I don't want to use a flash, or when I need a slow shutter, but couldn't hold the camera still for as long without a tripod.

It's more useful for longer lenses / large zooms.

I probably use it 20% of the time at the most.

zzzLazyDaisy

isofa wrote: »

You'll get people arguing for both camps, most professional quality equipment I use and come across uses the "in lens" systems, most employ a a gyroscopic type system.
I use it mainly in low light situations, where I don't want to use a flash, or when I need a slow shutter, but couldn't hold the camera still for as long without a tripod.

It's more useful for longer lenses / large zooms.

I probably use it 20% of the time at the most.

isofa - thank you so much, you have echoed what I thought, so that has been really useful. Also, it helps to know that the most benefit is when using a longer lens, which means that I will feel more confident buying an non-IS lens for shorter lenses - especially for close-ups, which I wasn't sure about.


Thanks also to TR Cooke for the vote of confidence in the kit!

Canon are doing a £50 cash back on this kit till end Jan - so I think I'll be haunting the christmas sales, looking for a bargain!

zzzLazyDaisy

One other question if I may?

I keep seeing references to USM and non-USM - what does this relate to?

Thanks

isofa

I doubt you'd ever need IS on a macro lens or a wide angle.

Better to spend the money on a faster lens in the first place.

You can't go wrong with the Canon kit, I've been using Canon SLRs for 20 years, and their DSLRs since they first appeared.

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

One other question if I may?
I keep seeing references to USM and non-USM - what does this relate to?
Thanks

Ultra-sonic motor. The almost silent motor powering the autofocus in the lens. Very quick, very quiet.

Non USM lenses aren't quite as fast at focusing, and more noisy (but still quiet!).