This contradicts with the earlier report on this list that IS version is considerably better then the NON-IS... I am not doubting anything but it is interesting.
evrim > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Zendel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:09 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: EOS 70-200L v. IS > > > Hi Jonathan > IMO, the only significant optical difference between these > lenses is the > performance at f/2.8. Both lenses tend to give similar slight > underexposure > wide open but the IS lens is slightly "softer". This is > considerably more > noticeable with the 2x Extender. In fact, I'm not sure I > would want to use > the combination wide open, whereas I had no hesitation with > the Non IS lens. > So your concern regarding micro contrast/detail seems well * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
