once upon a time Gary Russell wrote:
> I offered the hypothetical question of "why the 70-200 IS" a while back too,
> as the regular 70-200 is neither a slow nor particularly long lens so would
> the IS feature be of substantial benefit? A lot of people thought it would
> apparently as plenty are eager to shell out the kind of dough it's going to
> cost.
I think that for those of us who do reportage type of photo shooting the IS
is a boon. When you are hand holding a lens of the size of the 70-200 you
can't help but get a little fatigued..and when shooting at 1/60, or even
sometimes 1/30 of a sec it does not take much to introduce movement to ruin
a photo. The IS would make these type of shots much easier.
At least this is the reason I want one.
--
Harrison McClary
http://www.mcclary.net
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
