Canon wide angle IS lens

berrywoodson

berrywoodson

Messages
3
Name
Berry
Edit My Images
Yes
Does Canon have any immediate plans to produce a wide angle lens with image stabilization?
 
I think IS becomes less important as lenses get shorter, its a massive seal at 400mm but much less of one at 14mm.

Not actually an answer but I guess I'm saying that it is unlikely in the short term
 
How wide do you need it? There is the 17-55 IS

What are you intending on photographing?
Scenery might blow around too much, groups of people would move too much to really need a wider angle slower shutter.
 
I would imagine that the only people who could possibly answer your question are Canon.
Apart from that all you're going to get are opinions and guesses.
 
The rough guide for hand holdability is shutter speed = focal length.

At 10mm, an average person should be able to hand hold 1/10th, at 20mm 1/20th etc

At 1/10th thats about as slow as you'd want to go without getting into proper long exposures on tripods... and IS is about doing hand held snaps not time lapse photography.
 
I suspect cannon will do so at some stage , if only to compete with the makes with moving sensors.
The 17-55 f2.8 IS is their widest so far.

I used to be able to hold a rolleiflex steady at a 1/10 second with a very good hit rate.
Many years later my hands are more like an untrained jelly. So Is, is a god send.

As people get older they tend to have more to spend on their interests... for photographers this means, many can afford IS lenses to make up for their newly acquired frailties.

Canon will be well aware of this market place, and is already taking advantage of it in their new designs.

Middle aged and over will always be the largest group of purchasers of high end kit, though not necessarily the most prolific users.

I remember reading a Kodak statistic back in the 60's that camera shake was by far the worst contributor to poor pictures, going through their labs.
 
Byker28i said:
Fat people on a trampoline?
Click to expand...

I'm sure you meand fat people while you are on a trampoline... if the fat people were on a trampoline you would need a faster shutter speed anyway...
 
i have the 10-22 which is cracking lens. Im not sure that adding an IS version would reap any benefit though - unless I was on top of a very high mountain with very high winds!!
 
Only time IS would be of use with the 10-22 is indoor closeups where light is at a premium.

I used mine inside the museum at Le Mans last month and it was a godsend. Whilst my friends with their kit lenses were all having to stand back to get the whole subject in the frame, I could get right up close to it. This proved very handy as, when you step back to frame, people inevitably end up walking twixt you and the subject and you spend ages waiting for a clear shot. I had no such problems with the 10-22.

Used a monopod for stability and could happily take sharp shots at around 1/6s so IS would possibly have allowed me to ditch the monopod in this situation but I suppose that's just not enough to warrant producing an IS version when the majority of shots won't need it.

The other possibly consideration is whether IS could be done technically. UWA lenses use some fairly extreme optics to attain such a wide FoV without enormous distortion so it's possible that an IS mechanism would be very hard to produce within such optics.
 
coldpenguin said:
Hmm, so the accelerative forces would be the same, mass for mass

Are you saying that the air-resistance would be greater due to the increased size and wrinkles?
Click to expand...

Acceleration due to gravity is independent of mass and is only affected by resistance - and fat people have a larger surface area and as such more air resistance making them fall slower.
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
Acceleration due to gravity is independent of mass and is only affected by resistance - and fat people have a larger surface area and as such more air resistance making them fall slower.
Click to expand...

I thought air resistance was determined by mass and surface area (otherwise a ping-pong ball would have the same terminal velocity as a large ball bearing). As mass increases as the cube of the linear dimensions, and surface area increases as the square, then fat people should fall faster.
 
hollis_f said:
I thought air resistance was determined by mass and surface area (otherwise a ping-pong ball would have the same terminal velocity as a large ball bearing). As mass increases as the cube of the linear dimensions, and surface area increases as the square, then fat people should fall faster.
Click to expand...

No, ping pong balls fly differently due to surface tension and fluid dynamics not mass.

It would have the same terminal velocity of a ball of lead with the same shape, size and surface tension properties
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
Acceleration due to gravity is independent of mass and is only affected by resistance - and fat people have a larger surface area and as such more air resistance making them fall slower.
Click to expand...

but being larger they have a smaller SA to volume ratio which is a determining factor in the affect of fricitve forces on acceleration

though when it comes to fluids (ie air) shape becomes a significant factor.

I suppose a fat person would have a greater CSA as they are unlikely to be significantly taller than a thin person
 
david1701 said:
but being larger they have a smaller SA to volume ratio which is a determining factor in the affect of fricitve forces on acceleration

though when it comes to fluids (ie air) shape becomes a significant factor.

I suppose a fat person would have a greater CSA as they are unlikely to be significantly taller than a thin person
Click to expand...

Bottom line without going into degree level physics allowing for turbulance etc - acceleration due to gravity is indipendent of mass and a fat person would create more drag and fall slower
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
No, ping pong balls fly differently due to surface tension and fluid dynamics not mass.

It would have the same terminal velocity of a ball of lead with the same shape, size and surface tension properties
Click to expand...

Sorry - no.

From Wikipeadia -

6e306f943fc864e7ee41a1b3a7f16172.png


If the balls are the same, shape, size and surface properties - then the only thing that will differ in that equation is the mass (which will be substantially greater for the lead ball). So the terminal velocity will be higher for the lead ball.

If you want to take bouyancy into account then the difference will be even greater.

At their first tutorial, I used to get my science students to do an experiment measuring the time it took balls of various types to fall from different heights. Even in a classroom it was possible to see from the results that a ping-pong ball was approaching terminal velocity.
 
hollis_f said:
Sorry - no.

From Wikipeadia -

6e306f943fc864e7ee41a1b3a7f16172.png


If the balls are the same, shape, size and surface properties - then the only thing that will differ in that equation is the mass (which will be substantially greater for the lead ball). So the terminal velocity will be higher for the lead ball.

If you want to take bouyancy into account then the difference will be even greater.

At their first tutorial, I used to get my science students to do an experiment measuring the time it took balls of various types to fall from different heights. Even in a classroom it was possible to see from the results that a ping-pong ball was approaching terminal velocity.
Click to expand...

Apologies, the terminal velocity would be greater for a heaver object would be greater but in the example posted of people on a trampoline neither would be approaching anywhere near terminal velocity and the fatter person would accelerate more slowly
 
Would a 10-22 with IS have a higher Vt than one without?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top