Thanks for the explanations. The closest I would get to hand-holding a 300mm
lens would be to only use a monopod. I like the IS feature on my 28-135,
which I DO handhold all the time.
I'll keep looking for a 300/4 non-IS at a price I can afford
Tom P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "F. Craig Callahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 7:51 PM
Subject: EOS Re: IS vs. non-IS Sharpness (300/4L)
>
> IMO, it all depends on what you need. Personally, I would only hand-hold a
300mm
> lens out of necessity, and since the only advantages that the IS version
offers
> are weight (by a small margin), the IS itself, and a shorter close-focus
> distance, I would choose to save some money and go for the
optically-superior
> lens. But if you intend to use the lens hand-held most of the time, then
it
> might make sense to go with the IS version, since with the older model any
> advantage in raw optical performance is likely to be negated by camera
shake.
> Just because *I* use 300mm lenses almost exclusively on a support of some
kind
> doesn't mean that *you* work that way, so you need to make your decision
based
> on your own shooting style. But all things being equal, I think the non-IS
lens
> is a better value at current prices.
>
> fcc
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
