briansquibb said:I think everyone is aware of the benefit of IS for longer lens - the issue being disussed is when IS falls down on short lens where handshake looks like motion blur. This is presumably why Canon didn't include IS on wa.
what motion blur? Presumably 99% of all images shot with the newly announced EF 24/2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS will be stativ content ... landscape etc. There is no motion blur in static scenes.
Canon put IS into those 2 wide-angle lenses for exactly the reason Dilbert has given:
dilbert said:Factor in to that the pixel size and that smaller pixels typically require either a faster shutter or a more steady picture on the sensor.
IS is required to offset the increase in MP density.
And for the very same reason it is a crying shame that Canon did not also put IS into the new 24-70L II.