Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/06/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bernard a écrit : > My problem is the Canon IS lenses. If this really works, then why do we > need fast lenses? I've seen some graphs which report a resolution-loss > when the IS is on, but does that really show versus a "normal" lens > which is all shaky at slow shutter times? > --------------------------------------------------------------- Bernard, An IS lens only allows you to photography HAND HELD at lower speed. The only difference is you do not need a tripod. In fact, you must not use IS with a tripod. Faster lenses are justified, because : - The action that is photographed does not go slower because of the lens... - A faster lens allows you to work with slower film. An IS lens does not. - The depth of field is often a very important aspect of telephotography. The bookeh will be better with a 300 mm 2,8 than with a 75-300 mm zoom IS at 5,6. - It is accepted as a general rule that a lens is better at 2 stops under the full aperture. IS mechanism does not change the rule. But what is the quality of a lens at f11 ? - Cost - Perhaps : lock of resolution, etc... My 0.02$ Christian Payot