Bob Talbot wrote: Bold statements Chip. But ... go on, be honest ... how many people in the world have *actually* given both lenses an extended & fair side-by side trial? Two? I bet a non-IS lens is faster focussing than an IS one: or even the Canon one with the IS turned off will respond faster (?).
Canon lenses are the best (IMO) but actually, when it comes to it, procedural factors (how you use the lens) are dominant in determining the outcome. A badly focussed Canon lens is worse than a focussed practica every time ;o) Camera shake will kill every image. Award-winning images have been taken on cheap lenses. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob, et al, The main reason I use a Canon system is to take advantage of IS. Sharpness is the holy grail but there are many lenses that are equally sharp as Canons. I had 3 SLR bodies, 13 lenses, and when Canon came out with the 28-135mm IS I sold it all and switched. I never looked back and was very pleased with the results. Since then I have acquired several other Canon and non-Canon lenses. I own the 28-135 and 100-400 Canon IS lenses. Great lenses. If people would only concentrate on composing a taking a photo instead of simply lusting after the holy grail of sharpness, they would be far better off. As Alfred Eisenstadt said, "I don't care for lens tests. If I like a lens I use it." Peter K * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
