Best lens for panning motorsports

gus

Andy i hope your enjoying all this.

Will the IS lens have that much over a non IS for panning motor sport shots ? I have (most possibly incorrectly) assumed that the sharp focus would rely on photogs ability & avail light to keep the shutter speed up so IS would not come into it so much.

Im aware of switching vert/horizontals on/off with an IS to swing either 90 or 180....does this actually make a stellar diff for this use if shutter & f were comparable ?

wxwax

If you're trying to get a crisp image with no blur, then you're right, your shutter speed should be fast enough (on a sunny day.)

But the best motorsports shots have intentional blur when panning, to let the wheels blur a bit and to give the background a nice motion blur. In that case, IS does help, according to a lot of thoe guys quoted in our earlier discussion. Did you see that thread, with all the links to other forums? They discuss this issue a bit.

Steve Cavigliano

Gus,

I agree with Sid and check out Bones' image of the drag racer, he shot using the 70-200mm F2.8L IS, with IS "2" selected. If you are heavily zoomed and shooting around 1/200, while panning, IS should help you. How much? That's the question

Steve

BBones

Yup, with that shot I was in la-la land as far as distance goes and I had the TC on too. When you are zoomed in that much you want some help from IS, especially if you are planning on being out there for an entire day like I do...even the 828 wore my arm out after a day from holding it up.

April 1st is D-Day for the new equipment and I know I will be dropping some shots, just how many will be the question...it's a 3 day shoot.

Steve Cavigliano wrote:

Gus,

I agree with Sid and check out Bones' image of the drag racer, he shot using the 70-200mm F2.8L IS, with IS "2" selected. If you are heavily zoomed and shooting around 1/200, while panning, IS should help you. How much? That's the question

Steev

ian408

Don't know that you need IS for this type of work.
For slow shutter speeds, you might want IS. But on a sunny day
shooting with a tripod or a monopod, you do not need IS. You
need good technique.

I've been shooting surf shots with the IS turned off. In most cases,
the camera is mounted on a monopod although occassionaly, I'll
shoot handheld. By turning IS off, I think I've got more in focus
shots than OOF--maybe not keepers but at least they're in focus

I wonder if this is because the IS has not stabilized the lens for a
frame or two?

Ian

gus

Tks for the input guys...ian what lens & can you link me to some samples ? Would love to see some.

ian408

Gus,

This thread.

Ian

wxwax

ian408 wrote:

Don't know that you need IS for this type of work.
For slow shutter speeds, you might want IS. But on a sunny day
shooting with a tripod or a monopod, you do not need IS. You
need good technique.

I've been shooting surf shots with the IS turned off. In most cases,
the camera is mounted on a monopod although occassionaly, I'll
shoot handheld. By turning IS off, I think I've got more in focus
shots than OOF--maybe not keepers but at least they're in focus

I wonder if this is because the IS has not stabilized the lens for a
frame or two?

Ian

Say ian, think we might be talking at cross purposes?

When you shoot surfing, sounds like you're trying to freeeze the motion.

But if I understand gustamundo's question properly, he wants to shoot panning shots of motosports. Typically, photographers deliberately introduce blur into those shots, to give a sense of motion. So they go through a delicate ballet of shutter speed versus blur, and practice panning a lot, so that they can get a motion-induced blurry background, and yet a sharp image of the bike/car.

The question then becomes.... if you're panning and want blur, what use is IS? And the answer appears to be that IS still helps squelch unwanted vertical blur.

At least, that's my interpretation of gusnado's question. Could be I'm all wet, of course, been known to happen. :bluduh

ian408

wxwax wrote:

Say ian, think we might be talking at cross purposes?

When you shoot surfing, sounds like you're trying to freeeze the motion.

But if I understand gustamundo's question properly, he wants to shoot panning shots of motosports. Typically, photographers deliberately introduce blur into those shots, to give a sense of motion. So they go through a delicate ballet of shutter speed versus blur, and practice panning a lot, so that they can get a motion-induced blurry background, and yet a sharp image of the bike/car.

The question then becomes.... if you're panning and want blur, what use is IS? And the answer appears to be that IS still helps squelch unwanted vertical blur.

At least, that's my interpretation of gusnado's question. Could be I'm all wet, of course, been known to happen. :bluduh

Yes, there is the freeze. But this



is also with IS turned off.

The question, as I read it, was if you need or want IS. These are two very
different things. And I would argue that if you are using a tripod or monopod
that you do not need IS.

Ian

gus

Guys i dont even know the question.

Really just wondering if IS has it over non IS in very strong light for panning fast stuff. I think ian/waxedbowloffruit has answered my question that its more technique & shutter speed.

mercphoto

Humungus wrote:

Guys i dont even know the question.

Really just wondering if IS has it over non IS in very strong light for panning fast stuff.

It can help, but only if the IS implementation has a panning mode. For example, the Canon 75-300/IS cannot successfully be panned with IS on, but the 70-200/2.8L/IS certainly can, in mode 2. It will dampen the motion perpindicular to lens motion, while not doing anything in the direction of motion.

But remember, people were panning moving objects before the days of IS. Heck, they were also doing so in the days of manual focus. And of manual camera operation. And without motor drives. You get the idea.