I am not sure that I agree, Stephen. IS or VR extends the usefulness of
the camera, from better panning on things that don't follow a track,
like birds or animals, to enabling you to get that dimly lit interior
of a cathedral. You might be using, like I have, an 70-200 with a 2x
teleadaptor which pops it up to 600 mm equivalent and be able to get a
sharp picture at 1/250/sec because of the VR which may be fast enough
to freeze movement in the frame. I think it is probably less useful on
the fast lenses you mention and more useful on the slower lenses.
Certainly it enhances the slower, but light weight mild WA to mild zoom
that people like to use for travel. Probably the future of it is built
into the camera rather than paying for it each time you buy a lens or
like the rumored inclusion of it by Nikon into a zero gain version as
well as the other telextenders.
Winsor
Long Beach, California
USA
On Mar 31, 2004, at 10:43 PM, Stephen Scharf wrote:
> Perhaps it is best suited for
> really big, heavy lenses like a Canon 300 or 400/2.8, but personally,
> I wouldn't spend the extra cash for it if a non-IS equivalent were
> available for the kind of stuff I mostly do.
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|