Hi Chip, I think Dieter was joking. Anyway, I don't understand why anyone would have a lens with IS and not use it unless they were using a tripod. I've never had IS hurt an image, and I always keep it on unless I'm using a tripod. Also, I'm curious why you believe that the IS versions are less reliable or poorer optically. Can you relate something factual on this? Anyway, my vote would be for a 2.8 24-85mm as a replacement. I'd like the extra yardage out of the shorter end as I often find my 28-135 not quite wide enough. Also, for what it's worth, I don't think they'd need IS on this one unless they extend the longer end higher than 90mm or so. Cheers, JD
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chip Louie > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 8:14 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Re[2]: EOS New 28-70/2.8L ? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > BS> I have to agree with Chip. Keep the f/2.8 and the IS out to > > help keep > > BS> the price down. > > > > Or even better: produce it with IS and f/2 at the cost of a 50mm :-) > > > > Dieter (stuck somewhere in the dreamland where all wishes come true) > > > > > > > > Hey dieter, > > Even I have to draw the line at f/2.8 for a 28-105 zoom. It will be too > large, too heavy and way too expensive beyond this aperture and then you > want to ad IS!?!? All IS does is raise the street price > $400-$500 and make > the lens less reliable and potentially less compatable in the future. > Inexpensive IS lenses are a big compromise, cutting cost on IS lenses will > get us more dogs like the EF 75-300IS and to a lesser extent the EF 300 4L > IS. If a lens is to have IS Canon needs to identify the target market and > charge enough that the lens will be optically as good as a lens without IS > and with IS switched on be effective at stabilizing the image no > matter how > the camera or lens is positioned. Canon also needs to make the IS system > reliable and transparent in operation. I would MUCH rather have a lens > without IS if installing the IS system into the lens will make it any less > reliable than a similar non-IS lens design. > > > Regards, > > Chip Louie > > * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
