But I swear they’re made out of scotch tape and string. I’ve had four AF repairs in four years. The moving front element is especially vulnerable, but the internals are so fragile even a soft side blow kills it.

Now, admittedly, I shoot punk rock, sh!t happens. But my 24/1.4 I use probably 5x as much as my 50/1.4, and it’s only needed service once, and even that was an “it just kept getting softer” rather than the “failed stone dead” my 50/1.4 keeps pulling.

Although the one 24/1.4 repair, at $250, was nearly three $90 50/1.4 rebuilds.

A) like extending the ISO range, except without the extra noise or the faster shutter speeds to freeze motion.

B) like extending the maximum aperture, except without the shallower depth of field or the faster shutter speeds to freeze motion.

C) like a built-in tripod, except, because it is built-in, you cannot whip it out to wave it in the faces of muggers or ladies.

Maybe we should offer that to Canon’s advertising department to see if they want to use it. They can cleverly throw in “D) like all of the above”, and then Nikon can kiss their market share goodbye. ;-)

The other benefit of the in-lens solution is that i should be able to use it on my film camera.

But, yeah – going forward, i just don’t buy the Canon excuse that in-lens is a more effective answer. I just don’t want to have to re-buy all my lenses. Of course, that’s what Canon would prefer. We own more lenses than bodies. And, once we all reach our limits as far as sensor resolution goes, they’ll have few ways to convince us we need to upgrade the bodies. I’m quite certain they’re saving some features for that day. When we no longer need more megapixels, they’ll finally offer us IS and ECF.

I said it is “LIKE” extending the range. I thought it was obvious that ISO range itself isn’t actually changed. My point remains: If my exposure without IS, at my camera’s maximum usable ISO (let’s say 1600) is f2 at 1/60th, then WITH IS, i can shoot at 1/15th at f2, EFFECTIVELY, it’s LIKE my camera has a usable ISO 6400, without the additional noise that would accompany a real sensor change.

I never suggested it would give me a higher shutter speed. It gives me a lower usable shutter speed.

: ) Now, i will disagree with your statement, that IS “is a built in tripod.” It isn’t. You can’t use IS as a makeshift light stand. You can’t get a fluid head for it, to help you with the HD video. You can’t use it as a weapon to ward off a mugger. You can’t use it to impress the ladies….

I have very good Tripods, however, I don’t always have time or a place to set them up. For those who don’t want IS, use the off switch.

In my world, in-body IS would be a total Canon-suicide for a very big part of their market.. Imagine how many folks out there, that have spended thousands of dollars making their lens-collection as IS-rich as possible.. And then Canon starts to upgrade all of their bodies with in-body IS.. And the serious amateur-photographers out there will start to loose money, as IS-lenses will be no more (Or very little) more valuable than non-IS-lenses.. I would change platform sooner than they thought possible. Man, would I feel scr***d