harrison mcclary wrote:
>
> once upon a time Chip Louie wrote:
>
> > I was shocked to see that images shot with the IS version were
> > not nearly as sharp as the non-IS version. I tried another IS lens thinking
> > that maybe this was a fluke but the second lens was exactly the same. Then
> > magazines started testing the EF 300 4L IS and nobody who tested the IS
> > version in the lab could say the IS version was better as all tests
> > indicated that the IS version was clearly not as good. So until I get my
> > hands on an EF 300 2.8L IS I'll reserve judgment as Canon has lied before on
> > IS and lens performance to promote the technology.
>
> Hey, Chip, you sure have me thinking about seriously looking before selling
> the 70-200 and getting the new IS version. Guess I will have to borrow or
> rent an IS to test next to my non IS and see which is best in my
> applications.
>
> Thanks for your detailed response.
> --
> Harrison McClary
I started with the 300 f/4 IS version. I loved the lens but I
constantly heard how the non-IS version was even sharper. I traded the
IS for the non-IS. After half dozen trips, I compared scanned images
(Nikon LS2000). I could not tell any difference all the way up to
pixelation. Also, the tripod collar on the IS version is FAR superior.
Plus the IS version has almost macro focusing, much closer than the
non-IS version. Shooting macros with the 300 can really blow out some
backgrounds. Unless you need to get really tight (1:2) you don't even
need to attach an extension tube. Then I traded the 300 non-IS for
another IS version. Finally, I traded the 300 IS for the 100-400 IS to
get the same features plus more focal range. I hope you can learn from
my mistakes.
The non-IS version may be sharper on a machine or maybe a test chart
under ideal conditions. But in about thirty rolls of film, I could tell
no difference. My recommendation: First, get the 100-400 IS zoom if you
can afford it. You get the 300 IS plus more range. Second, buy a 300
IS, new or used. Third, buy a new or used 300 non-IS.
According to Photodo, the optics of the 100-400 IS @ 300 is the same as
the optics of the 300 f/4 IS lens. So you don't lose anything and you
gain the versatility of a 100-400 zoom that is very sharp through out
it's range. It has even closer macro capability because you can zoom
out to the 400mm end. It is really a great all around, all purpose
lens. It's not that much more expensive than the 300 f/4 IS.
My $.02
Ray Amos
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
