On Fri, 5 Jan 2001 10:03:28 +0100, you wrote:
>
>Which fixed f/5.6L are you talking about ? In France the 400 f/5,6 L is
>less expensive than the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS...
My mistake! Posting too late at night. It is as you say.
>
>Anyway, I had the 400 f/5,6 L and change for the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS.
>The sharpness at 400 mm is the same (I always use them at f/5,6).
>
>As you say, the zoom is more flexible and the IS is really great for quiet
>subjects. I can shoot at 400 mm at 1/30 with more than 75 % of perfectly
>sharp images.
>
>The prime is lighter and much more easy to handle (the tripod collar on the
>zoom is too close from the camera body IMHO). The integreted lense hood is
>very strong and perfectly protect the front element.
>
>For your use on birds and planes, that are fast moving subjects, the prime
>will be easier to use and the IS would not be so much useful (even using
>"stabilisation mode 2"). For flying bird photography, I turn the IS off
>most of the time...
Interesting! Not having any experience with IS, why is this? Does
the panning movement overload the IS sensors?
Also, am I correct in thinking that the prime 400mm f/5.6L has an
advantage in that it can be used with a TC? Sorry, I'm unclear on
the use of TC's with zoom lenses.
Thanks for your response
>Regards,
Ken Durling
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
