----- Original Message -----
From: "F. Craig Callahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: EOS extenders
>
> Different optical formula. The IS versions of the super-teles (at least
the 300/2.8L)
> are said to be *more* sharp than the non-IS versions.
>
> Craig
>
>
Is this true? I had heard (no facts, just unsubstantiated opinions) that it
was just the reverse. Photodo isn't much help, it ranks the 300/4 at 4.3,
well ahead of the 300/4IS at 3.4, and the 75-300 IS just below the non-IS
version (3.2 vs 2.9), but there are not comparable figures for any of the
other pairs. I'm hoping to spend some "slush" funds on the 300/4 one of
these days soon, do I need to wait another year and save for the IS 300/4
instead?
TIA,
tomp
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
