OT - So Michael...

"markB" > wrote in message
om...
> From dwight, on 2/7/2008 6:25 PM:
>> To heck with all this nonsense.
>>
>> I've got the Canon Rebel XT, and now I'm reading about the new Rebel XSi.
>>
>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...er/PMA2008.jsp
>>
>> Do I want one?
>>
> If it truly has spot metering, hell yes!
>
> -mb

Yeah, but it has to be compelling.

Years ago, I bought the S1. Then the S2 came out (3MP to 5MP), but it wasn't
compelling. Then the S3 came out (6MP instead of my 3MP AND 12X optical zoom
vs. my 10X), and it was somewhat compelling. By then, I'd bought the Rebel
XT and upgrading the S1 was out of the question. The S5 came out, and I was
seriously tempted, but...nah.

Then the S1 zotzed out. Because it had a service bulletin out on it, Canon
ended up replacing my S1 with a refurbished S3, so the S5 no longer looked
quite so compelling.

Well, my Rebel XT isn't all that old. I'd have to look long and hard at the
XSi before shelling out for a new camera.

And spot metering...? Since I work almost exclusively on manual, I'm sure I
could continue to screw up my shots even with that.

Given my track record, it's probably the NEXT Rebel that will grab me.

dwight

"Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
...
> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>> dwight wrote:
>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to the current administration (had to get that jab in
>>>>>>>>>> there), fiscal America is sinking like a stone.
>>>>>>>>> You do know that all this sub-prime mess got rolling under
>>>>>>>>> Clinton? cough< republican congress
>>>>>>> Who was it that said "The buck stops here"?
>>>>>> Wasn't ME.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm the ATM for my family. I'm Buck Teflon. I take out $20 and hand
>>>>>> it over that night.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I always tell 'em, "I know where to get more," but, jeez, it'd be
>>>>>> nice to have some currency in my wallet for more than 24 hours.
>>>>> You first mistake was telling them you know where to get more. Just
>>>>> tell them the money tree died and the new one won't mature and bare
>>>>> fruit for several years.
>>>> Fine, but half the tree belongs to my wife.
>>>>
>>>> The problem I have with HER is that she's actually the one that will
>>>> go to an ATM and withdraw $20. That's ridiculous. I understand
>>>> frugality, but I also deal well with reality, and taking out $20
>>>> doesn't save you money, it just makes you go back to the ATM more
>>>> often.
>>>> Me, I take out $100. Doesn't mean I spend it faster, just means that
>>>> I don't have to go back the next day.
>>> Since I work from home, I could easily live for a month on $100 cash.
>>
>> I work from home and live on $50 cash/month. Of course the debit card's
>> almost worn out...
>>
>>>> Actually... my wife doesn't have to go back the next day either.
>>>> She's got me. So it all evens out.
>>
>> Question for y'all: So this tax "refund" we'll be getting this year -
>> will this be a repeat of the 2001 nonsense?
>> http://tinyurl.com/2ac2pw
>
> I doubt I'll see a check so to me it is irrelevant. My guess is that
> every check they send out will be cashed and no thought will be given to
> the details.

Sending it back wasn't one of my options. I'll probably just sign the back
and send it on to the credit card company.

)

dwight wrote:

>> The extenders DO NOT autofocus, there usefulness is largely negated by
>> that fact alone. Getting a perfectly manually focused long distance shot
>> through that setup is a way less than 50/50 chance. I never use mine, if
>> I had realized just how useless it would be I would have spent the $300 on
>> a different lens.
>
> I think it's funny where this conversation has gone. I asked about a $1,000
> camera, not a $7,000 lens!
>
> Hell, if I could afford that lens, I could probably afford a new camera to
> go with it.
>

Hey, YOU'RE the one that spent all that money on a lavish stereo
system for a 15 year old car!


--
"Yah know I hate it when forces gather in ma' fringe..." - Sheogorath

"Daytime television sucked 20 years ago,
and it still sucks today!" - Marc Bissonette

From dwight, on 2/8/2008 5:33 PM:
> "markB" > wrote in message
> om...
>> From dwight, on 2/7/2008 6:25 PM:
>>> To heck with all this nonsense.
>>>
>>> I've got the Canon Rebel XT, and now I'm reading about the new
>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>
>>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...er/PMA2008.jsp
>>>
>>> Do I want one?
>>>
>> If it truly has spot metering, hell yes!
>>
>> -mb
>
> Yeah, but it has to be compelling.
>
> Years ago, I bought the S1. Then the S2 came out (3MP to 5MP), but it
> wasn't compelling. Then the S3 came out (6MP instead of my 3MP AND
> 12X optical zoom vs. my 10X), and it was somewhat compelling. By
> then, I'd bought the Rebel XT and upgrading the S1 was out of the
> question. The S5 came out, and I was seriously tempted, but...nah.
>
> Then the S1 zotzed out. Because it had a service bulletin out on it,
> Canon ended up replacing my S1 with a refurbished S3, so the S5 no
> longer looked quite so compelling.
>
> Well, my Rebel XT isn't all that old. I'd have to look long and hard
> at the XSi before shelling out for a new camera.
>
> And spot metering...? Since I work almost exclusively on manual, I'm
> sure I could continue to screw up my shots even with that.
>
> Given my track record, it's probably the NEXT Rebel that will grab
> me.

I'm impressed if you use full manual that much! I usually walk around
on shutter priority. I've been needing a DSLR for a while but there
just hasn't been one that compelled me. I don't need 12MP, but at this
level, this one finally looks like there are no glaring weakneses, and
has the features I couldn't find in one camera. Like the Nikon D40x has
no dust reduction, the XTi has no spot metering. But the XT remains a
nice camera, and I know what you mean about needing enough advance to
compel a move up.

-mb

"dwight" > wrote in
:

> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Joe wrote:
>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>> :
>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to the current administration (had to get that jab in
>>>>>>>>>>> there), fiscal America is sinking like a stone.
>>>>>>>>>> You do know that all this sub-prime mess got rolling under
>>>>>>>>>> Clinton? cough< republican congress
>>>>>>>> Who was it that said "The buck stops here"?
>>>>>>> Wasn't ME.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm the ATM for my family. I'm Buck Teflon. I take out $20 and
>>>>>>> hand it over that night.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I always tell 'em, "I know where to get more," but, jeez, it'd
>>>>>>> be nice to have some currency in my wallet for more than 24
>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>> You first mistake was telling them you know where to get more.
>>>>>> Just tell them the money tree died and the new one won't mature
>>>>>> and bare fruit for several years.
>>>>> Fine, but half the tree belongs to my wife.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem I have with HER is that she's actually the one that
>>>>> will go to an ATM and withdraw $20. That's ridiculous. I
>>>>> understand frugality, but I also deal well with reality, and
>>>>> taking out $20 doesn't save you money, it just makes you go back
>>>>> to the ATM more often.
>>>>> Me, I take out $100. Doesn't mean I spend it faster, just means
>>>>> that I don't have to go back the next day.
>>>> Since I work from home, I could easily live for a month on $100
>>>> cash.
>>>
>>> I work from home and live on $50 cash/month. Of course the debit
>>> card's almost worn out...
>>>
>>>>> Actually... my wife doesn't have to go back the next day either.
>>>>> She's got me. So it all evens out.
>>>
>>> Question for y'all: So this tax "refund" we'll be getting this year
>>> - will this be a repeat of the 2001 nonsense?
>>> http://tinyurl.com/2ac2pw
>>
>> I doubt I'll see a check so to me it is irrelevant. My guess is that
>> every check they send out will be cashed and no thought will be given
>> to the details.
>
> Sending it back wasn't one of my options. I'll probably just sign the
> back and send it on to the credit card company.
>
>)

Ditto. And that's the fallacy of this thing. People will pay of debt
rather than buy stuff.

Joe wrote:
> "dwight" > wrote in
> :
>
>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Joe wrote:
>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> dwight wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to the current administration (had to get that jab in
>>>>>>>>>>>> there), fiscal America is sinking like a stone.
>>>>>>>>>>> You do know that all this sub-prime mess got rolling under
>>>>>>>>>>> Clinton? cough< republican congress
>>>>>>>>> Who was it that said "The buck stops here"?
>>>>>>>> Wasn't ME.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm the ATM for my family. I'm Buck Teflon. I take out $20 and
>>>>>>>> hand it over that night.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I always tell 'em, "I know where to get more," but, jeez, it'd
>>>>>>>> be nice to have some currency in my wallet for more than 24
>>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>> You first mistake was telling them you know where to get more.
>>>>>>> Just tell them the money tree died and the new one won't mature
>>>>>>> and bare fruit for several years.
>>>>>> Fine, but half the tree belongs to my wife.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem I have with HER is that she's actually the one that
>>>>>> will go to an ATM and withdraw $20. That's ridiculous. I
>>>>>> understand frugality, but I also deal well with reality, and
>>>>>> taking out $20 doesn't save you money, it just makes you go back
>>>>>> to the ATM more often.
>>>>>> Me, I take out $100. Doesn't mean I spend it faster, just means
>>>>>> that I don't have to go back the next day.
>>>>> Since I work from home, I could easily live for a month on $100
>>>>> cash.
>>>> I work from home and live on $50 cash/month. Of course the debit
>>>> card's almost worn out...
>>>>
>>>>>> Actually... my wife doesn't have to go back the next day either.
>>>>>> She's got me. So it all evens out.
>>>> Question for y'all: So this tax "refund" we'll be getting this year
>>>> - will this be a repeat of the 2001 nonsense?
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2ac2pw
>>> I doubt I'll see a check so to me it is irrelevant. My guess is that
>>> every check they send out will be cashed and no thought will be given
>>> to the details.
>> Sending it back wasn't one of my options. I'll probably just sign the
>> back and send it on to the credit card company.
>>
>> )
>
> Ditto. And that's the fallacy of this thing. People will pay of debt
> rather than buy stuff.

But my guess is that most will run the old credit card back up real soon.

"markB" > wrote in message
om...
> From dwight, on 2/8/2008 5:33 PM:
>> "markB" > wrote in message
>> om...
>>> From dwight, on 2/7/2008 6:25 PM:
>>>> To heck with all this nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> I've got the Canon Rebel XT, and now I'm reading about the new
>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...er/PMA2008.jsp
>>>>
>>>> Do I want one?
>>>>
>>> If it truly has spot metering, hell yes!
>>>
>>> -mb
>>
>> Yeah, but it has to be compelling.
>>
>> Years ago, I bought the S1. Then the S2 came out (3MP to 5MP), but it
>> wasn't compelling. Then the S3 came out (6MP instead of my 3MP AND
>> 12X optical zoom vs. my 10X), and it was somewhat compelling. By
>> then, I'd bought the Rebel XT and upgrading the S1 was out of the
>> question. The S5 came out, and I was seriously tempted, but...nah.
>>
>> Then the S1 zotzed out. Because it had a service bulletin out on it,
>> Canon ended up replacing my S1 with a refurbished S3, so the S5 no
>> longer looked quite so compelling.
>>
>> Well, my Rebel XT isn't all that old. I'd have to look long and hard
>> at the XSi before shelling out for a new camera.
>>
>> And spot metering...? Since I work almost exclusively on manual, I'm
>> sure I could continue to screw up my shots even with that.
>>
>> Given my track record, it's probably the NEXT Rebel that will grab
>> me.
>
> I'm impressed if you use full manual that much! I usually walk around on
> shutter priority.

I bought the S1, because I was frustrated with my film work. I spent the
first month on full AUTO, but I've been using manual settings ever since. Of
course, the S1 had live view, so I could adjust on the fly and pretty much
know what I was going to get. With the XT, I rely heavily on the light
meter, but I'm getting comfortable with shutter speeds, aperture, etc. I
like my images a tad darker than AUTO gives me. The trade-off is those
missed opportunities, while I'm fumbling with the settings.

> I've been needing a DSLR for a while but there just hasn't been one that
> compelled me. I don't need 12MP, but at this level, this one finally
> looks like there are no glaring weakneses, and has the features I couldn't
> find in one camera. Like the Nikon D40x has no dust reduction, the XTi
> has no spot metering. But the XT remains a nice camera, and I know what
> you mean about needing enough advance to compel a move up.
>
> -mb

You may not NEED 12MP, but that will be the standard soon enough anyway. And
more is usually always better. It's just that the jump from 8 to 12, for me,
isn't enough to make me shell out another $1000, when I've already got a
camera that's more capable than its user.

The biggest problem with a DSLR, as I'm sure we'll all attest to, is the
Lust for Lenses. I've got four in my arsenal already, and I'm auditioning
two more in the near future. I'll have the 400mmL glass over the next couple
of weeks, and will be working on another Real World Lens Test (or, Results
That the Average Mook Can Expect) for the website. This is the 400mm prime
(not zoom), and if it is as sharp as I hope it is, I'll be thinking long and
hard about picking one up for my own.

It's an addiction.

dwight
www.tfrog93.com

markB wrote:
> From dwight, on 2/8/2008 5:33 PM:
>> "markB" > wrote in message
>> om...
>>> From dwight, on 2/7/2008 6:25 PM:
>>>> To heck with all this nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> I've got the Canon Rebel XT, and now I'm reading about the new
>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...er/PMA2008.jsp
>>>>
>>>> Do I want one?
>>>>
>>> If it truly has spot metering, hell yes!
>>>
>>> -mb
>>
>> Yeah, but it has to be compelling.
>>
>> Years ago, I bought the S1. Then the S2 came out (3MP to 5MP), but it
>> wasn't compelling. Then the S3 came out (6MP instead of my 3MP AND
>> 12X optical zoom vs. my 10X), and it was somewhat compelling. By
>> then, I'd bought the Rebel XT and upgrading the S1 was out of the
>> question. The S5 came out, and I was seriously tempted, but...nah.
>>
>> Then the S1 zotzed out. Because it had a service bulletin out on it,
>> Canon ended up replacing my S1 with a refurbished S3, so the S5 no
>> longer looked quite so compelling.
>>
>> Well, my Rebel XT isn't all that old. I'd have to look long and hard
>> at the XSi before shelling out for a new camera.
>>
>> And spot metering...? Since I work almost exclusively on manual, I'm
>> sure I could continue to screw up my shots even with that.
>>
>> Given my track record, it's probably the NEXT Rebel that will grab
>> me.
>
> I'm impressed if you use full manual that much! I usually walk around
> on shutter priority. I've been needing a DSLR for a while but there
> just hasn't been one that compelled me. I don't need 12MP, but at this
> level, this one finally looks like there are no glaring weakneses, and
> has the features I couldn't find in one camera. Like the Nikon D40x has
> no dust reduction, the XTi has no spot metering. But the XT remains a
> nice camera, and I know what you mean about needing enough advance to
> compel a move up.

My next camera will probably be a Canon (40D) but I will be looking at
all the CMOS sensor cameras out there. One thing I want to consider is
a camera body with built-in image stabilization. This makes buying
lenses much less expensive. I know why Canon and Nikon can't do it.
They have a lens lineup that is set and they make too much money from them.

Actually, the dust reduction feature in the new Canons isn't a big
attraction to me. I have never had big problems with dust on the 300D.
The one thing that is nice about the new Rebel is it uses a mirror in
the viewfinder. This should really improve the brightness of it. It is
amazing how fast the DSLRs are advancing.

As for megapixels I'll take as many as they can give me while
maintaining decent shot to shot speed. Computers are plenty fast and
hard drives are plenty cheap to handle the larger file sizes.

dwight wrote:
> "markB" > wrote in message
> om...
>> From dwight, on 2/8/2008 5:33 PM:
>>> "markB" > wrote in message
>>> om...
>>>> From dwight, on 2/7/2008 6:25 PM:
>>>>> To heck with all this nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've got the Canon Rebel XT, and now I'm reading about the new
>>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...er/PMA2008.jsp
>>>>>
>>>>> Do I want one?
>>>>>
>>>> If it truly has spot metering, hell yes!
>>>>
>>>> -mb
>>> Yeah, but it has to be compelling.
>>>
>>> Years ago, I bought the S1. Then the S2 came out (3MP to 5MP), but it
>>> wasn't compelling. Then the S3 came out (6MP instead of my 3MP AND
>>> 12X optical zoom vs. my 10X), and it was somewhat compelling. By
>>> then, I'd bought the Rebel XT and upgrading the S1 was out of the
>>> question. The S5 came out, and I was seriously tempted, but...nah.
>>>
>>> Then the S1 zotzed out. Because it had a service bulletin out on it,
>>> Canon ended up replacing my S1 with a refurbished S3, so the S5 no
>>> longer looked quite so compelling.
>>>
>>> Well, my Rebel XT isn't all that old. I'd have to look long and hard
>>> at the XSi before shelling out for a new camera.
>>>
>>> And spot metering...? Since I work almost exclusively on manual, I'm
>>> sure I could continue to screw up my shots even with that.
>>>
>>> Given my track record, it's probably the NEXT Rebel that will grab
>>> me.
>> I'm impressed if you use full manual that much! I usually walk around on
>> shutter priority.
>
> I bought the S1, because I was frustrated with my film work. I spent the
> first month on full AUTO, but I've been using manual settings ever since. Of
> course, the S1 had live view, so I could adjust on the fly and pretty much
> know what I was going to get. With the XT, I rely heavily on the light
> meter, but I'm getting comfortable with shutter speeds, aperture, etc. I
> like my images a tad darker than AUTO gives me. The trade-off is those
> missed opportunities, while I'm fumbling with the settings.

Have you tried using the over/under exposure settings in the camera?
You can also bracket the exposures to get one shot with differing
exposures. This might help you get shots at those times when you don't
have time to work under full manual mode. Shooting in the RAW format
also gives much better control over exposure during post processing.

>> I've been needing a DSLR for a while but there just hasn't been one that
>> compelled me. I don't need 12MP, but at this level, this one finally
>> looks like there are no glaring weakneses, and has the features I couldn't
>> find in one camera. Like the Nikon D40x has no dust reduction, the XTi
>> has no spot metering. But the XT remains a nice camera, and I know what
>> you mean about needing enough advance to compel a move up.
>>
>> -mb
>
> You may not NEED 12MP, but that will be the standard soon enough anyway. And
> more is usually always better. It's just that the jump from 8 to 12, for me,
> isn't enough to make me shell out another $1000, when I've already got a
> camera that's more capable than its user.
>
> The biggest problem with a DSLR, as I'm sure we'll all attest to, is the
> Lust for Lenses. I've got four in my arsenal already, and I'm auditioning
> two more in the near future. I'll have the 400mmL glass over the next couple
> of weeks, and will be working on another Real World Lens Test (or, Results
> That the Average Mook Can Expect) for the website. This is the 400mm prime
> (not zoom), and if it is as sharp as I hope it is, I'll be thinking long and
> hard about picking one up for my own.

This is why I will consider DLSRs with in-body image stabilization
before my next purchase. It reduces future lens costs dramatically and
the lenses are much lighter.

> It's an addiction.

"Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
...
> dwight wrote:
>> "markB" > wrote in message
>> om...
>>> From dwight, on 2/8/2008 5:33 PM:
>>>> "markB" > wrote in message
>>>> om...
>>>>> From dwight, on 2/7/2008 6:25 PM:
>>>>>> To heck with all this nonsense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've got the Canon Rebel XT, and now I'm reading about the new
>>>>>> Rebel XSi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...er/PMA2008.jsp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do I want one?
>>>>>>
>>>>> If it truly has spot metering, hell yes!
>>>>>
>>>>> -mb
>>>> Yeah, but it has to be compelling.
>>>>
>>>> Years ago, I bought the S1. Then the S2 came out (3MP to 5MP), but it
>>>> wasn't compelling. Then the S3 came out (6MP instead of my 3MP AND
>>>> 12X optical zoom vs. my 10X), and it was somewhat compelling. By
>>>> then, I'd bought the Rebel XT and upgrading the S1 was out of the
>>>> question. The S5 came out, and I was seriously tempted, but...nah.
>>>>
>>>> Then the S1 zotzed out. Because it had a service bulletin out on it,
>>>> Canon ended up replacing my S1 with a refurbished S3, so the S5 no
>>>> longer looked quite so compelling.
>>>>
>>>> Well, my Rebel XT isn't all that old. I'd have to look long and hard
>>>> at the XSi before shelling out for a new camera.
>>>>
>>>> And spot metering...? Since I work almost exclusively on manual, I'm
>>>> sure I could continue to screw up my shots even with that.
>>>>
>>>> Given my track record, it's probably the NEXT Rebel that will grab
>>>> me.
>>> I'm impressed if you use full manual that much! I usually walk around
>>> on shutter priority.
>>
>> I bought the S1, because I was frustrated with my film work. I spent the
>> first month on full AUTO, but I've been using manual settings ever since.
>> Of course, the S1 had live view, so I could adjust on the fly and pretty
>> much know what I was going to get. With the XT, I rely heavily on the
>> light meter, but I'm getting comfortable with shutter speeds, aperture,
>> etc. I like my images a tad darker than AUTO gives me. The trade-off is
>> those missed opportunities, while I'm fumbling with the settings.
>
> Have you tried using the over/under exposure settings in the camera? You
> can also bracket the exposures to get one shot with differing exposures.
> This might help you get shots at those times when you don't have time to
> work under full manual mode. Shooting in the RAW format also gives much
> better control over exposure during post processing.

I'm familiar with all of that, and I suppose I could always do my
corrections in post-processing, too, but I drive stick. I think it's more
fun, but sometimes that extra second results in a missed shot. I admit that,
sometimes when timing is critical, I'll switch over to Auto, but that's
rare.

>>> I've been needing a DSLR for a while but there just hasn't been one that
>>> compelled me. I don't need 12MP, but at this level, this one finally
>>> looks like there are no glaring weakneses, and has the features I
>>> couldn't find in one camera. Like the Nikon D40x has no dust reduction,
>>> the XTi has no spot metering. But the XT remains a nice camera, and I
>>> know what you mean about needing enough advance to compel a move up.
>>>
>>> -mb
>>
>> You may not NEED 12MP, but that will be the standard soon enough anyway.
>> And more is usually always better. It's just that the jump from 8 to 12,
>> for me, isn't enough to make me shell out another $1000, when I've
>> already got a camera that's more capable than its user.
>>
>> The biggest problem with a DSLR, as I'm sure we'll all attest to, is the
>> Lust for Lenses. I've got four in my arsenal already, and I'm auditioning
>> two more in the near future. I'll have the 400mmL glass over the next
>> couple of weeks, and will be working on another Real World Lens Test (or,
>> Results That the Average Mook Can Expect) for the website. This is the
>> 400mm prime (not zoom), and if it is as sharp as I hope it is, I'll be
>> thinking long and hard about picking one up for my own.
>
> This is why I will consider DLSRs with in-body image stabilization before
> my next purchase. It reduces future lens costs dramatically and the
> lenses are much lighter.

I understand that. That 400mm doesn't have IS, but as long as I'm shooting
faster than 1/80, I'm probably good. My 70-300 has it, and the 100-400L that
I rented had it (and that sucker got heavier as the day wore on), and I'm a
convert to IS. My S1 (now S3) has it built-in, and when I first started
using it, I swore it was magic. Shooting handheld at 1/20th of a second...

I wonder what would happen if you put an IS lens on a camera with IS.

dwight