Jun 02, 2007 23:46 | #1 My understanding... correct me if I am wrong. Gear
LOG IN TO REPLY |
KeithR Goldmember 2,856 posts Likes: 1 Joined Aug 2006 Location: Blyth, Northumberland, NE England More info | Jun 02, 2007 23:48 | #2 I'm sure it's bound to happen that Canon will get round to adding the latest IS to their long lenses.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nicksan Man I Like to Fart  24,738 posts Likes: 53 Joined Oct 2006 Location: NYC More info | Jun 03, 2007 00:02 | #3 The 70-200 f4 IS has the latest IS...up to 4 stops. drifter106 wrote in post #3310622  My understanding... correct me if I am wrong. 1. Canon has gone through many (?) different versions of IS 2. The efs 17-55 IS has the latest IS 3. The 100-400 IS is an older version IS 4. Newer version of IS provides 1 or more additional fstops If all of the above are true, is it possible for Canon to put the latest IS technology into their tele's and primes...could we see this possibly happening? regards, John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
canotographer Senior Member  810 posts Joined May 2007 More info | Jun 03, 2007 00:51 | #4 All mid to tele long (zoom or fixed) should have IS... Mark
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Cathpah Goldmember  4,259 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jan 2006 Location: Maine. More info | Jun 03, 2007 05:42 | #5 bound to happen at some point. just a matter of when. Architecture
LOG IN TO REPLY |
wimg Cream of the Crop  6,982 posts Likes: 209 Joined Jan 2007 Location: Netherlands, EU More info | Jun 03, 2007 10:12 | #6 drifter106 wrote in post #3310622 My understanding... correct me if I am wrong. 1. Canon has gone through many (?) different versions of IS 2. The efs 17-55 IS has the latest IS 3. The 100-400 IS is an older version IS 4. Newer version of IS provides 1 or more additional fstops If all of the above are true, is it possible for Canon to put the latest IS technology into their tele's and primes...could we see this possibly happening? regards, John I think the current version of the 100-400 may have slightly better IS than its official 2 stops. I couldn't get a picture without shake blur with a Tammy 200-500, at 500 1/640s, not even at 1/800s, while I get 50% keepers at 400 1/45s with the 100-400 IS, provided the subjects) are static enough, of course EOS R & EOS 5 (analog) with a gaggle of primes & 3 zooms, OM-D E-M1 Mk II & Pen-F with 10 primes, 6 zooms, 3 Metabones adapters/speedboosters, and an accessory plague
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 1503 guests, 127 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
.