-- Original Message --
>At GFM one of the speakers was
>John Ashburn, who uses Canon. He had the 100-400 IS, or whatever it is,
>and it's pretty amazing...you can handhold it at 1/60 at *400mm*...I
>tried it and it's un-freaking-believable.
>
>I have no idea whether or not the glass is any good, but I can see how
>some people could come to depend on the ability.
For wildlife and sports photographers, IS/VR will allow shots that simply
wouldn't be possible with a tripod. Even if you use a faster film it'll
let you choose a higher shutter speed or smaller aperture than an equivalent
conventional lens. This translates into a greater number of successful images
and for a working professional that's literally money in the bank.
Apparently, there's a little loss in ultimate sharpness under ideal conditions
(tripod mounted and IS/VR turned off) but if I were earning a living doing
this kind of photography (and using by own gear as opposed to that provided
by an employer) I'd be shooting Canon, great Pentax glass be damned. If
you're relying on your photography to put food on the table you want to
get the maximum number of marketable shots you can. If you're doing landscapes,
architecture, portraits, fine art photos, you don't need IS/VR at all (I
think), but for PJ, sports and wildlife VR/IS = $$$.
Frankly I'm really surprised other camera manufacturers are taking so long
to compete with Canon in this technology and I'm *amazed* that Nikon has
been so slow in responding (they have only one VR lens IIRC). I'd guess
Nikon's professional support and marking clout have allowed them to hang
on to their masive share of the pro market but I think Canon will make inroads
if the balance doesn't shift a bit.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
