I don't really mean to open an old can of worms.......but........ Regarding the Canon 300 f4 IS vs non IS versions.....there has been a good deal of debate regarding comparative sharpness, photodoto ratings etc and I was just wondering if anyone out there has actually used both lenses and what you feel about results in terms of sharpness and contrast with IS turned off on the IS lens vs the non-IS, both on a tripod. Yes, I know this defeats the benefit of being able to use the 300 hand held but I find that I do most of my shooting on a tripod anyway. The times I have used the IS handheld I have come away thinking the shots could be a bit sharper , but I have tended to use it this way with shutter speeds that are probably too slow even for the IS like 1/60. Anyway, I was contemplating getting a non IS 300 since I use a tripod most of the time IF the results were really sharper and more contrasty with it...no need to trade it in for results that are the same. I mean I would just as well have the IS as not if image quality is similar. So, anyone use both?
Howard * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
