Ooh grats man!
I'm still with my old trusty 400D hehe, I really envy the HD video features dSLR's have today though. Their video looks so good! [shocked]

Thanks.

First couple of resized (they were massive) images while i get used to it:

http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/994...mediumb.th.jpg http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9...4medium.th.jpg http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/2...mediumr.th.jpg http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/1...1medium.th.jpg
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/4...5medium.th.jpg http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/1...0medium.th.jpg http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/7...9medium.th.jpg http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/4...4medium.th.jpg
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/6...9medium.th.jpg http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/418...0medium.th.jpg http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/7...mediumu.th.jpg http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/4...1medium.th.jpg
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/852...mediumu.th.jpg http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/4...6medium.th.jpg http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2...9medium.th.jpg http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/74/...5medium.th.jpg
Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I really wish canon would embed IS into the body. I have a hard time keeping the camera stable at 1/30.

HAve fun with your camera. I got the parent of that one, 1000D years ago. Going strong until now with a Tamron 17-50 2.8F lens, no IS unfortunately.

In my opinon in lens IS is generally better than in camera IS (provided of course its decent in lens IS).

One important thing to remember with any kind of IS though. Whilst it will allow you to take shots at lower shutter speeds without camera-shake, it does nothing if your subject is moving. Being able to shoot at 35mm at 1/10 second is great, but if your subject is moving around, its still going to be blurred!

As you increase the focal length, IS starts to become a lot more important, as camera shake is greatly magnified with focal length. With my 100-400 IS I can shoot handheld at 400mm at 1/160 second. Without IS I'd need to be at 1/600 or more when shooting at 400mm handheld to ensure no camera-shake (unless I was propped of course).

IS on shortedr focal lengths is mainly useful for shooting static subject in low-light conditions. Its not advisable to try long exposure settings handheld and rely on IS. At best you'll manage maybe 1/5 at 18mm - which is still not enough for most long-exposure related effects you are probably after (traffic trails etc).

I agree with you, but I'd like the option of an in-body IS than none considering the prices of IS vs non-IS lenses from Canon and Nikon are staggering. If the lens has IS, then simply switch off the in-body IS.

That's the only thing i'm waiting for from Canon or Nikon before I get a new camera.

Dont think will happen anytime soon. You should just look at sony or pentax if you really need the inbody IS http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ies/laugh1.gif

I went for the newer III than the older EF-S II IS as Canon's site mentioned a re-design and better optics with the III. Also, this comes as the standard kit lens with the newer EOS 1100D. I must say the optics are excellent with the EF-S III. I couldn't find an official test done on this lens by any of the photography websites! It produces great images when attached to this beginner DSLR (EOS 1100D). Anyone tried it other than me? Perhaps this lens needs a closer look by the Pros!