This is a great demonstration of something I've suggested several times in the past.
Having SR in the body doesn't stop a manufacturer from building it into a lens. Canon and Nikon are in a pickle. (That has actually worked out rather well for them.) If they build it into the bodies they will eat into the sales of all of those very expensive IS lenses. So, they've gone on the marketing campaign of telling the world the in-lens is better and gone as far as building a set of cheap IS/VR kit lenses to close the issue. By the way - I have a theory that it wasn't Pentax, Olympus and Sony offering in-body SR that motivated them to do this. I think the motivation came from all of the customers that are moving up from point and shoots that had the feature. It's interesting that Pentax first offered both the k100/110 bodies, giving customers a choice. Most must have voted with their wallets. We don't see a 200/210. Only the SR model survived. One last thought. In my Saturday morning photo classes I do a demonstration similar to that in the video. I connect the A/V output of my little Optio A10 to the video projector. When the class sees the difference between SR and non-SR on the 8 foot tall screen, they all are convinced they want the feature. GS <http://georgesphotos.net> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:20 AM, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The was posted over at DPReview: > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPdy52mR6Io> > > I wasn't at all surprised at the result of running both systems > simultaneously. > > Cheers, > > Dave > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
