Pentax claim their shake reduction is worth "2.5 to 4 stops". Some Canon ads describe some of their lenses as having "3-stop" or "4-stop" IS.
Are these claims anywhere near believable? What are actual users of K100D or K10D finding? If those claims are real, then an F 2.8 lens with three-stops of extra tolerance for low light will (in some ways) match an F 1.0 lens. Wow! Even if it is only one stop, or 1.5, that's still a very useful gain. If Pentax's "2.5 to 4 stops" claim is accurate, then like a Sigma 18-50/2.8 zoom (equivalent to 28-75 on 35mm) then becomes awfully attractive. That one lens could handle nearly all of the shots I take. If the claim is accurate, then even a fairly slow lens like the Pentax 20-35 F4 becomes quite usable in low light. What if you use a fast lens? An F 1.2 prime plus the claimed 2.5-4 stops gives F 0.5 or better. Even a 1.8 becomes remarkably good in low light. Or is this all just too good to be true? Yes, I do realise that a shake reduction system will neither allow fast shutter speeds for stopping motion nor give the reduced depth of field that a fast lens will. Also, that no magic is going to make a poor lens perform like a top-of-the-line one, or a zoom like a good prime, in sharpness, color rendition, etc. But, given a decent lens, what sort of low light performance should one expect? -- Sandy Harris Quanzhou, Fujian, China -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
