Monito wrote:
Ah yes, a expert purist who insists we should all use old equipment without any useless modern features. Why stop there? Shoot film with 50 year old manual cameras? Oh, wait, been there, done that, still do. However, ....
I figure that if IS is good enough for pros, it is good enough for me in the same kind of situations and goals as a pro would have making their photo.
Do you build all your furniture yourself without any of them new-fangled power tools, which are just crutch?
These people should just use a canvas and a paintbrush.
People with that type of mindset are in the same league as those who opposed AF...funny how things turned out (not in their favor). But hey, there's always leica for all those experts out there.
The funny thing is that Canon is obviously NOT putting IS on all their new lenses. 24-70 anyone? Use it or not, IS allows a photographer to capture images they otherwise couldn't.
rerdreb wrote:
Only partially kidding. 600mm might be a little bit of an exaggeration but I certainly think it is marginal at best in 200mm. Over 200mm I can see a need for some people.
Anything else is a fashion statement IMHO.
That is ridiculous. I often carry the 24-105 when traveling, and have found IS indispensable at times. For instance, found an old abandoned factory while on a walk and got some nice shots inside at shutter speeds down to 1/2 and 1/4 second. Not a chance I would have gotten good results without IS or a tripod, and I am not one to drag a tripod along when heading out to dinner in a foreign country.
