--- Austin Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > > With a 10-24 lens with IS, I would be able to get good handheld > > > results at 1 sec consistently. > > > > THAT is exactly why I want a 24-70 IS.... crowds, spontaneous > > capabilities, and no room for a > > tripod. Great image! thanks for sharing, > > That would require both the photographer and the subject(s) being perfectly > still for ONE SECOND. For me, at least, that wouldn't be useful. I don't > take pictures of static things very often, if at all, and I don't buy L > lenses to get blurry pictures that look like Polaroids. But, I certainly > understand it might possibly be (though IMO quite limited) useful for some > people. > Austin, my comment was directed at the resulting image, not trying to hand-hold for one second, which is virtually impossible. I my instance, I want to be able to carry the camera around WITHOUT the tripod and flash; be a "fly on the wall" during a conference, not interrupting and interfering with people's presentations by setting up a tripod or blowing out their retinas with a big flash...I still like the idea of the 24-70 L IS. Jane
____________________________________________________________________________________ Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
