> > Bob Sull wrote: > > Markus Proske wrote: > > > > > Chip Louie wrote: > > > > > > > A fixed length, sealed lens barrel like my EF 70-200 2.8L. Built-in > > > > protective UV filtered glass front element and armored outer filter > > ring, > > > > shock absorbing hood mount, o-ring sealed lens mount would be a good > > start. > > > > Then add about 35mm on the long end and keep the f/2.8 lens speed > > and keep > > > > the IS feature OUT of the lens to make it affordable. > > > > I'd love Canon to produce an (24)28-105(135) with IS and L-lense quality > > but constant aparture of 3.5 or 4 to reduce weight.. > > > > Still dreaming, Markus. > > > I have to agree with Chip. Keep the f/2.8 and the IS out to help keep > the price down. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Guess you guys don't use IS. That is the #1 reason I switched to EOS. > Otherwise I would be a Nikon or Minolta user. For me, I will give up the > F2.8 for an F4 but would love the IS. > > Peter K > An "IS" user
Hi Peter, Guess what, you're incorrect. Some of use DO use IS lenses and with that experience and knowledge would rather have a 1-2 stop faster lens than a slower IS lens. IS technology is impressive on the new super teles (I rented an EF300 2.8L IS), and 70-200 2.8L IS zoom when used within its' limits. But IS just can't give me back the two stops of shutter speed I need to freeze subject motion that a faster lens can and IS seems to slow down AF capture speed and tracking. So for ME, more often than not IS stays switched off. Regards, Chip Louie Regards, Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
