n0b0 wrote: PetKal wrote:
If I was into hand-held macro photography I could probably justify the acquisition of the new lens for IS alone.
Meh, I shoot all my macros handheld and so do many other macro shooters here and elsewhere. Natural light or not, we\'re doing just fine without any IS. Very few people will have a real reason for needing IS for macro, the rest only want it as a shortcut. That\'s fine too, just don\'t pretend it\'s anything but...
\"Meh\".....what does that mean ?
Well, N0b0, all I know is that I am having a great difficulty stabilizing the lens/camera sufficiently when I am attempting to do macro shots like this (in natural light). Granted, IS will not help with the wobble (coaxially with the lens) but should help with shakes in other directions/planes.
Oct 17, 2009 at 10:28 PM
Previous versions of PetKal's message #7654270 « 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests »
