This lens is next on my list to replace my 17-40, which I shall be selling to part fund it! The IS will certainly help increase it's overall usefulness in low light.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Yea! In "the year of the lens", we've started out with two lenses no one asked for.
Why do people ignore the 70-200mm f/4 IS? It is stunningly sharp, almost as sharp as the "best" f/2.8s, and a fraction of the weight and price.
But what if the IS version winds up having even worse optics? Besides...at 17mm, you can't completely stabilize the corners, can you? Not unless the stabilization can rotate...
you do not know what a selective curve is - do you
It's a thread that discuss the estimation of the sensor's performance based on DXOmark scores. DXOmark doesn't review cameras, as you said, merely sensors (actually, they probably review raw files but that's another issue). It's clearly not the thread to talk about sales and cameras features so I don't understand why you keep bringing this up.
I don't really get why canon users need to defend their far inferior sensor.....Envy?
It is what it is, and apparently most of the sensors are inferior to the nikon's(or sony) in almost every aspect.
Whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is not really that relevant.
It only matters that you are happy with the images you are getting, despite maybe not having the best equipment out there....
Looking at it from a canon users perspective (now) , I am just happy that Nikon is totally destroying canon in the sensor department , It means canon will sooner or later have to follow with better sensors.
All the time some of you spend trying to bash Nikon or defend canon, you better spend that time working so you can add a d800 with 14-24 to your kit