Elliot, Peter and Everyone,
I follow with interest the thread regarding Canon v. N1 benefits and flaws. I am a professional nature photographer and the following are my thoughts on the original question re. image stabilization and large aperture lenses.
By intro, I shoot the Contax 645 for 80% of my landscape and macro work--with 35, 45, 80, 120 and 210 lenses (thank God zooms are finally coming!) For my wildlife work, I shoot Canon EOS (I sold out my Nikons many years ago). My lenses are 20-35, 35-350 and 400 2.8 with converters PLUS heavy Gitzo CF tripod and Arca-Swiss head. For ultralight backpacking and panoramic ability, I shoot Mamiya 7II. I do not have a digital camera as I prefer the higher quality of scanning my slides.
My critera, always, is quality, quality, quality. My work is at
www.guyharrisonphoto.com (I put my money where my mouth is).
I pick what gear works best and have bought everything I own after extensive rentals and comparisons of different gear.
So much for intro. My first comment is the "sharpness equation." This is film speed, camera motion, subject motion and lens quality. Sharpness requires slower speed film, solid camera support, and shutter speeds sufficient to freeze subject motion. Lens quality is usually the least significant aspect of the equation, as the first three elements have far more impact on image quality. This is real-world truth, not Pop Photo or MTF theory.
Film is a personal choice. The finest quality is in slower speed (ASA 50-100) slide films. Slower print films are also excellent but I do not use them because the professional (publication/print/advertising) market generally prefers slides. If you go with higher speed film, sharpness suffers. I Assume you use high quality film.
As for camera movement, the basic truth is that Gitzo and Slik will do more for sharpness than the finest lenses. A TRIPOD IS ESSENTIAL FOR SHARPNESS. No matter how good you think you are, no handheld shot will be as sharp as a tripod shot except maybe for bright daylight shooting.
If you must shoot handheld, then the new IS systems do indeed work very well especially in the telephoto range (80mm and up). The IS mechanism basically "replaces" a tripod. While the result might not be quite as sharp as a tripod shot, it is an amazing improvement--allowing full professional quality results with careful handholding. The superb optical quality of Zeiss (which I respect but do not necessarily concede in 35mm compared to Canon "L") cannot make up for degrading camera shake. At this time, Contax has no comparable technology, but you can get similar benefits by buying/renting a Kenyon gyro stabilizer (affordable for professionals only--if you are an amateur, go with IS). I used the Kenyon for 10 days on a small boat in SE Alaska with stunning handheld results even with the 645 and 210mm.
If you are buying new, my personal experience has been that Canon's IS is best, especially in the telephoto ranges and with converters where it is needed most--but if you already are a Nikon user, no need to switch.
If you are going to handhold in the telephoto range, IS will outperform Zeiss in the real world--take that to the bank!
However, camera shake is only one variable in the sharpness equation--the other is subject motion. No amount of IS will give you sharpness if you are shooting moving subjects at 1/60 second. To handle subject motion, large apertures (giving higher shutter speeds) are the only option IF you want professional quality images on professional quality film. We don't carry these heavy lenses into the field for fun or for status--they are the gear that gets the job done. Large apertures, of course, also aid in controlling camera shake.
My recommendation, if you want to shoot wildlife and will be handholding, is to go with the Canon 70-200 2.8 (optically superb) IS (technologically excellent)and 1.4 and 2x converters. The other option is the Canon 100-400 3.5-5.6 L IS and a 1.4 converter if needed. The former gives you higher shutter speed without converters, the latter is more versatile.
As my last note, several messages have dealt with AF speed and accuracy. If you are shooting wildlife there is no substitute. Contax AF is good. For professional use, though, Canon is head and shoulders above in terms of speed, accuracy, focus tracking and focus coverage. No slam on Contax, but the fact is that they are 2 generations behind the others.
Personally, I am watching the N system with interest. Contax, probably wisely from a marketing view, did not target nature photography professionals with the initial N offerings. If the N system developed an indestructible pro camera body (like F5 or EOS 1V),lenses and IS comparable to Canon, I would consider a switch as lens quality then becomes more important. Given Contax's long lead time, though, this won't happen for years (and maybe never). I would not wait if you need something now.
I love my Contax 645. The N system is not there, yet. DON'T FALL IN LOVE WITH A BRAND--USE WHAT WORKS FOR YOUR NEEDS.
If you are set on Contax, you are hurt by the absence of a large-aperture telephoto lens. The optical design of the small-aperture lenses may be great, but they are not fast enough to allow quality results handholding with slow speed film.
Hope this helps. Good luck!
Guy Harrison
handheld, if you are shooting wildlife, birds or sports
