IS lenses vs non IS lenses, are they worth the extra money?

[chaos133]

Hey everyone, I was wondering what your thoughts were on IS vs non IS lenses, are they worth the extra money?

I'm thinking of getting a Canon EOS 1100D with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II Lens and the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens. I can get this for $709 AUD.

I can get the same but with the the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II Lens and the Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1.2 Lens Canon Mount (both lenses non-IS) for $547 AUD.

Should I save some money and go with the non IS or should I spend a bit more and get the IS kit?

Also, does anyone know the real world battery life for the Canon EOS 1100D? I never trust the specs on the websites so I'm looking for people who have this camera to tell me the approximate battery life.

Thanks for anyones help

[chrisk]

This isn't just about IS, this is also about different lens'. To cut a long story short, yes IMO you should pay extra for IS especially for telephoto zoom lens'.

[ATJ]

Yes, in most cases IS lenses are worth the extra money.

I shoot Nikon, so they are called VR (but it is the same thing). After many years of photography, I bought my first VR lens earlier this year and I was absolutely blown away by the difference it makes. This is on a 70-300mm lens and it is obvious just looking through the viewfinder how much it stabilises the image. I liked it so much I have already replaced my 18-55mm with a VR version. I just wish there was a VR version of the 60mm macro lens.

[Aussie Dave]

Anything that benefits the photographer is a good thing.

Of course it is no replacement for technique but it will allow you more options when the light levels are forcing you to use a less-than-optimal shutter/aperture/ISO settings....generally more beneficial for your longer focal lengths but can also be handy with shorter ones when the light levels are really low and using a tripod is not an option.

Also, as Rooz pointed out different lenses will have different optical qualities. Just because two different lenses have may have the same focal length (eg. 18-55mm), this doesn't mean that they will be the same optically. Just something to keep in mind when looking at lenses, regardless of IS.

Dave

[the foto fanatic]

There is no reason to buy a non-VR or (IS) lens.

The technology is proven and the price differential is peanuts in the scheme of things.

I suggest that if you don't buy it you will regret it.

[aim54x]

Between the kits stated...I would also vote the IS. The 18-55 IS II is quite an improvement over the elderly 18-55 II, and the IS in the longer lens is worth the excess alone!

[chaos133]

Thanks for your help everyone. I'll definitely get the IS lenses now