Canon Lens - "normal" vs Image Stabilising

[Podie]

I'm just about to purchase a 70-300mm lens for the camera (Canon 300D) before going on holiday.

I was all set to buy the Canon EF Zoom Lens - 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III - USM (and a filter) brand new from Jessops in Southend (excellent service and advice there from Nina)... but a mate of mine is selling his Canon EF Zoom Lens - 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM - the Image Stabilising jobbie (his Canon got nicked and he has bought a Nikon).

So... question is... do I buy the "normal" lens... or the year old Image Stabilising jobbie..? Is the Image Stabilising worth it...?

Thoughts..?

[sihemm]

Had a I/S lens a while back and found it heavier and after a few hours use you feel the extra weight The only advantage (over the non I/S) was better tracking of moving subjects - in my case motorbikes.
If you are getting it for a good price (similar to non I/S) go for it, otherwise not worth the extra dollar compared to the non I/S. Only my opinion; being strictly amateur!

[simpo two]

Podie said:

his Canon got nicked and he has bought a Nikon).

Sounds like the D70 Clud (Sabotage Wing) at work

[Rude Girl]

simpo two said:

Podie said: his Canon got nicked and he has bought a Nikon). Sounds like the D70 Clud (Sabotage Wing) at work

Well they didn't do a very good job then, did they Simpo? If they'd have had the lens nicked as well, it could have found its way back to Podie for a tenner!

[Podie]

Rude Girl said:

simpo two said: Podie said: his Canon got nicked and he has bought a Nikon). Sounds like the D70 Clud (Sabotage Wing) at work Well they didn't do a very good job then, did they Simpo? If they'd have had the lens nicked as well, it could have found its way back to Podie for a tenner!

a tenner, you say... go on then

[406]

Rude Girl said:

simpo two said: Podie said: his Canon got nicked and he has bought a Nikon). Sounds like the D70 Clud (Sabotage Wing) at work Well they didn't do a very good job then, did they Simpo? If they'd have had the lens nicked as well, it could have found its way back to Podie for a tenner!

No No No. It's a Canon lens, make that a fiver

[Rude Girl]

You rotten sods!

Well since I shoved it further off topic, I feel I ought to bring it back (Podie knows where I live).

What's the advice then? Is a second hand IS lens better value than a non-IS with warranty if they're both about the same price?

[406]

Rude Girl said:

You rotten sods! Well since I shoved it further off topic, I feel I ought to bring it back (Podie knows where I live). What's the advice then? Is a second hand IS lens better value than a non-IS with warranty if they're both about the same price?

The used IS one is worth slightly less than the ew Non IS. However, accidental damage to any of them should be covered by household insurance If you get my drift

[Bee_Jay]

Podie said:

Hmm... still torn as to what to do... Seems that the IS function is a nice to have, rather than a need to have... question is, does it warrant the extra money...? Bee Jay.. thanks for the post and the links... but some of the techno-speak stuff was a bit over my head... can I have it in "simple" please...?

How much extra money are we talking here?

[Podie]

Bee_Jay said:

Podie said: Hmm... still torn as to what to do... Seems that the IS function is a nice to have, rather than a need to have... question is, does it warrant the extra money...? Bee Jay.. thanks for the post and the links... but some of the techno-speak stuff was a bit over my head... can I have it in "simple" please...? How much extra money are we talking here?

Been offered the IS for £200...

[Podie]

Just been reading about the "DO" lens... wow! Looks cool, but a bit of overkill for an enthusiastic amateur...!!

V6GTO said:

I've got the 100-400L IS and believe me, the IS gets you shots you can't get otherwise. Martin

Think is Martin... how do I put this..? You're a bit good at this photo malarky... I'm just trying to move up from taking snaps to taking pictures...

Realistically I'll be taking photos of cars (moving and stationary), scenery, the odd bit of wildlife, and probably trying to catch people unaware (which I like doing!).

Really appreciate the thoughts and imput..

[Podie]

Bee_Jay said:

The 75-300 IS is the first generation IS, and is not all that good (we are now on 3rd Generation, with lenses like the 70-300 DO IS). As such it only gives you a 1-1.5 stop advantage in real life, as opposed to the 2.5 to 3 of the latest lenses. It does however get a higher rating than the 75-300 III USM, and given the choice between the 2, I would probably buy the IS.

Ah, got my head round this now...

[Ex-biker]

I'm following this with interest.

I was thinking of a 100-400mm Canon or 80-400mm Sigma as my next purchase (both IS/OS).

Since moving to a Dslr from the Canon S1 IS, the IS is something I really miss. I found I rarely used a tripod before for static shots, but need it now (70-300mm Sigma APO).

For action & motorsport thought I find I can get good enough (imo anyway) results without the IS.

Higher than 300mm though? Is IS a must?

[Bee_Jay]

At £200 it would be worth getting the IS.

I have the 70-300 DO, and it is fantastic. Small, and always in my camera bag. Used it almost exclusively at a wedding reception on Sat night.

It is an OUTSTANDING lens. The IS really is useful.

I do borrow a 100-400L off a friend for special occasions though (motorsports etc.) though can't justify the investment personally as yet and have more than coped with the 70-300 in the past.

I find that the difference between 300 and 400 really isn't that much in real life, and on a 1.6x body (20D, 300D etc.) 300mm is quite a lot of reach (equivalent of 480mm).

Having said that, a big white lens like the 100-400 does get people to move out of the way to get a shot as they realise you are 'working' and in the past has got me straight past security with no questions asked.