Am I being fed a line?

[KC Foggin]

Dealing with a different salesman at my local camera store cause my regular guy is gone for a month.

That said, this new salesman tells me that the lenses with VR and IS often produce photos inferior i.e. lack of sharpness compared to a regular lens of the same size. When asked if I could look at one, he told me he had none in stock. Soooo, do you think it was a line of bull because he rather I buy one in stock or is there some truth to this? Thanks.

[robski]

Hi KC

There is an element of truth in what he is saying but it is all relative. It also depends on what emphasis you put on the word inferior.

With lens there are a number of rules of thumb which in general are a good guide but there are exceptions to these rules. i.e a Prime lens is generally better than a zoom mainly for two reason. One is the primes have less glass elements so inherently has an advantage. Two the designer only has to be concerned about one focal length as opposed to keeping the performance over a range of lengths. This does not guarantee that a prime will be better than a zoom because there are poor models of prime about.

Likewise a x3 zoom is generally better than a x10 zoom. But if you spend enough money on a x10 you can get some pretty decent lenses.

So if you compare an IS to a non-IS version of the same lens generally the non-IS has the edge because it has less glass elements. But if you handhold the advantages of IS takes over from the non IS.

What it pays to do is source good lens reviews based on professional opinion and bench tests as opposed to some of the reviews attached to shopping sites. The shopping site reviews are based on the reviewer's terms of reference which maybe he or she would not know a good lens if they fell over it. Plus opinions tend to vary wildly from excellent to rubbish.

This site has a large range of lens you can compare - the higher the numbers the better the rating

http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylens.jsp

Fred Miranda site is a well respected site

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

Also The Digital Picture

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

You will quickly get a consensus from these sites if a lens is Good, average or poor.

I am sure other members can add to this list of good quaility review sites.

[KC Foggin]

Wow Rob, thank you. Going to do some reading of the links you provided tonight. So much to be aware of when shopping for the right lens.

[robski]

Originally Posted by KC Foggin

Wow Rob, thank you. Going to do some reading of the links you provided tonight. So much to be aware of when shopping for the right lens.

Yes welcome to the nightmare of choosing the right lens. There are a number of factors and compromises in the final choice. Weight, compatability with TC, price, image qualitiy, build quality and how comfortable you are using it. Maybe if a member of either forum lives near you will let you try a lens before you buy. The quality of cheap lens can range from bad to fair. Mid price lens can be acceptable. Top Dollar lens are normally excellent. You should really take more care over the choice of lens than camera body because when you have a good lens it may out live many camera bodies. You have to think of it as an investment. Cutting corners may lead to disappointment.

[KC Foggin]

I agree with everything you are saying and I must admit that I am probably better off sticking with the digiscoping until I can afford a quality lens that I will be happy with. I can't thank you enough Rob for all your wisdom.

[Russ Jones]

I have noticed a difference in image quality when using IS. I prefer not to use it and use a tripod instead but sometimes a very slightly inferior shot is better than not getting the shot at all.

Russ
www.russjonesphoto.com

[Ant]

Hi Kc,
First of all, I havent had any experiance with a stablised lens, and this is just what I think.
If your going to be hand holding most of the time, then I would reccomend getting a stablised lens, even if the quality is less than a lens without stablisation. Also your shots should not be ruined by camera shake.

ant

[Annette]

I have to say I have used an image stabilised lens and I do not like it at all. I could never get my images sharp. I hand hold pretty much all of the time and never use an is lens. My lens is very sharp. I do not think an is lens is really worth the extra money. Good luck in your hunt KC.

[Robert Davis]

Interesting discussion. I only use Canon AF IS lenses and have very satisfactory results. The lenses that I use most commonly are: 28-135 IS and the 100-400 AF IS zooms. I use the IS all the time and am able to take great shots at slow speeds handheld. I use a 500 AF IS for birds. This is also a wonderful lens but if I use the 100-400 with a 1.4 I really cannot tell the difference.