Pete, Sure IS is a great thing in Video cameras so that the playback is stable. No one wants to see video image dancing around the screen. For still photography however it is a clever marketing gimmick and nothing more. Let me try to make this clear and simple. I don't need a tripod either when I am shooting with am f 2.8 lense and don't have to compromise sharpness either. IS lenses do inherently have to compromise sharpness due to certain laws of physics, and there is nothing that can be done about that.With video the benefit of that trade-off truely outweighs the drawbacks, but not in the slightest with still photography. And if 35mm won't give a sharp image as you would assert, then all the more reason to have a sharper lense to give you that edge. Richard >No one said IS lenses 'act' like they are 2 stops faster. They just let you >fudge slower shutter speeds with longer focal lengths. This is useful for >people who don't have the luxury to carry a tripod around (like newspaper >photographers). Obviously they have longer depth of field, yadda yadda yadda. >As for ultimate sharpness... well, 35mm won't give it to you anyway, and the >whold idea behind the lenses is to compromise a bit of sharpness for being able >to handhold in dimmer light. >Pete -- Richard D. Scherrer Northern Exposures Photography Phone: (406) 837-6911 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.northernexposuresphoto.com
