On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:04:24 -0400, you wrote:
>I'm sorry if this question has been asked before in this mailing list. Since
>I don't have any IS lenses, I'm curious whether an IS lens would be slower
>than a similar lens without it? E.g., would the EF 70-200/2.8 IS L be slower
>than the old Canon 70-200/2.8 L because the IS technology adds more time
>when focusing or taking the picture? Bare with me please :-)
>
>Jansen.
I assume you mean "fast" in the sense of how quickly does the
stabilizer act, as opposed to the f/stop speed. IS is quite
fast-acting. I believe I read somewhere that it's under a second to
stabilize, and I think that would be with considerable camera motion.
In my experience with the 28-135 (the "L" IS lenses might be even
faster) it is practically instantaneous. I haven't used it to
photograph any ping-pong balls, though! ;-)
Ken
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
