> > Note too that the MTF graphs in the "L" lens brochure (Pub.
> > CT2-1505-004) for the two 300/4L lenses, while not the easiest to
> interpret (at
> > least for me) would appear to support Photodo's results.
> >
>
> I don't think I agree with that. I just had a look at the MTF
> graphs in the
> Canon Lens Work, and the IS version is better in allmost
> every aspect.
Those MTF curves from Canon Lens Work were calculated, not measured.
On the other hand Photodo's MTFs were obtained from real physical tests.
Also, Photodo doesn't seem to have bias towards IS or non-IS lenses,
while it is obvious that Canon earns money on non-IS to IS upgrades.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
