IS is good, especially with long lenses. But for best
effectiveness, I think Canon has it right: build the IS as a
matched component into individual lenses. That way you can do it
best for each lens so equipped, rather than a compromise
solution that nets some effectiveness for all lenses.
I only own one Canon lens with IS ... the 300mm f/4L IS ... and
it is an absolute stunner in both optical quality and in its
ability to damp camera motion. And it will fit on any EOS body,
leaving the investment in optimized IS in the lens to use with
any generation of body.
I would love to see Pentax come out with a set of IS equipped
longer lenses. They could be made compatible with any body by
incorporating a power source into the lens itself ... After all,
a set of AA lithium cells will run an *istDS for well over 1000
exposures. A pair of them are light, provide a lot of power for
the weight, and could run an in-lens gimbal for hours
continuously. The only thing that would be required to get
smooth, fully coordinated operation is a way for Pentax to
switch on the IS as soon as metering became active in the body,
if the IS enable switch on the lens was on. I wonder if they
could do that with a little trickiness by reading the aperture
sensing circuit state.
Imagine: IS lenses backwards compatible to film bodies that use
the A series lenses... ;-)
Godfrey
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
