Perhaps I'd better add a few words about why I ask this question. I've read a review that almost quotes the Canon marketing department on this issue. I'm ok with that, but when the author serves this as the truth I react. So now I have a debate going in a Norwegian forum about this issue. BTW. I didn't start it, some other guy questioned the quoting first.
Speaking of angels. I'm not on a crusade in this issue. I'm simply asking for first hand experiences. First hand experiences are a lot more worth than defensive marketing. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts Sent: 29. januar 2007 00:01 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Camera based SR vs. lens based IS? Tim Øsleby wrote: >The market (many at the market) says that camera based SR is best at short >focal lengths, and lens based IS is best at long focal length. > >What do you who have used SR for a while say? Truth or myth? >We have had the theoretical debate, but what does practical use tell us? It's a useless debate, quite similar to the CCD/CMOS debate in futility: Even if you oversimplified issues sufficiently to make a simple answer possible, it would change in a few months because both systems are being continually improved by their makers. If you're going to waste your time speculating, do it on a more useful issue like the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
