Canon EOS 20D - is this review fair?

Just wait until the groom gets the bill - there should be a moment of
stunned silence shortly afterwards!



"Skip M" wrote in message
news:GFTHe.27134$HV1.3490@fed1read07...
"Cockpit Colin" wrote in message
...

"Skip M" wrote in message news:ZFAHe.25485

I thought it was the non IS version that had the problems...

I was (am?) seriously considering the lens - so I was ploughing through
the
feedback on it. Most raved about it, but then someone chipped in about
the
Error 99s which spurned a whole new sub-thread.

Gist of it was "if they switched off the IS it was OK" - so must of
course
be the IS version - a few had the non-IS version and none reported any
problems.

It seemed that in most cases those who had the problem got it after
having
had the lens for quite some time, and the subject to contacts between
lens
and camera (and the need for them to be cleaned) seemed to be the most
likely cause/solution, although it didn't seem to be the magic answer for
all (alignment was mentioned as well).

It was high on my wish list, but having tried the non IS version I came
to
the conclusion I'm prob better off with the 100 - 400 L series for nature
work, and a 24-70 L for day to day stuff (after my F1.2 100mm L for
portraits). I could trade in my Rolex for all three, but problem is I
don't
have a Rolex



Hmm, I'm considering the lens, too. I have the 24-70 and 100-400, but
sometimes, the latter is overkill, plus I need the extra speed. I shoot
weddings, and one can't guarantee that the subjects will remain motionless
for any length of time, especially right after the ceremony... ;-)

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

Usually, it's the brides father, and the trick is to get him to stand still
for it! G

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
"Cockpit Colin" wrote in message
...
Just wait until the groom gets the bill - there should be a moment of
stunned silence shortly afterwards!



"Skip M" wrote in message
news:GFTHe.27134$HV1.3490@fed1read07...
"Cockpit Colin" wrote in message
...

"Skip M" wrote in message news:ZFAHe.25485

I thought it was the non IS version that had the problems...

I was (am?) seriously considering the lens - so I was ploughing through
the
feedback on it. Most raved about it, but then someone chipped in about
the
Error 99s which spurned a whole new sub-thread.

Gist of it was "if they switched off the IS it was OK" - so must of
course
be the IS version - a few had the non-IS version and none reported any
problems.

It seemed that in most cases those who had the problem got it after
having
had the lens for quite some time, and the subject to contacts between
lens
and camera (and the need for them to be cleaned) seemed to be the most
likely cause/solution, although it didn't seem to be the magic answer
for
all (alignment was mentioned as well).

It was high on my wish list, but having tried the non IS version I came
to
the conclusion I'm prob better off with the 100 - 400 L series for
nature
work, and a 24-70 L for day to day stuff (after my F1.2 100mm L for
portraits). I could trade in my Rolex for all three, but problem is I
don't
have a Rolex



Hmm, I'm considering the lens, too. I have the 24-70 and 100-400, but
sometimes, the latter is overkill, plus I need the extra speed. I shoot
weddings, and one can't guarantee that the subjects will remain
motionless for any length of time, especially right after the ceremony...
;-)

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com