> When I got my first IS lens, the 100-400, there was a list of bodiesin the manual that would not work with IS, according to Canon. I didn't have any of those bodies so I didn't pay any further attention to it. This was right when the 100-400 came out, so about 1998.
The compatibility table in the 100-400 manual is not entirely clear. And it makes not mention of the variant behaviour with self-timer, MLU or BULB.
A better table can be found at: http://eosdoc.com/manuals.asp?q=IScompat
This table makes things a bit clearer. Since my film bodies at the time of the 100-400 purchase were fairly recent, and had full compatibility, I didn't worry about the details, but I did remember that IS didn't work the same on some of the earlier bodies.
My point was just that Canon continues to evolve their EOS technologies, and sometimes things get left in the dust. This is inevitable, and cannot be helped unless there is no advancement, or crippled advancement.
Besides photography, I'm an architect. One of the most common CAD programs on PC's is AutoCad, which has been out for over 20 years. One of it's main problems during that time has been the desire to maintain some compatibility with earlier versions. This has crippled the program in various ways, and in the last 10 years it had lagged behind a number of other, much less expensive CAD programs in usability and productivity. Each version abandons some compatibility in favour of more functionality, but it still lags behind. Remnants of its ancestry as a DOS program running on an 8086 processor are still in evidence.
Compatibility issues hobble innovation.
-- * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
